Ogilvy Bernie: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Ogilvy Bernie: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:623;Page:18658] 
2.  
BERNIE OGILVY (United Future) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: Is he satisfied that it is fair to base eligibility for student allowances for students under 25 on their parents’ income even if the students are married or have been supporting themselves for two years; if so why? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Yes. The changes to student allowances apply the parental income test in a manner consistent for all students who do not have dependent children. 
Bernie Ogilvy 
: How can the Government claim that it has removed one form of discrimination on the basis of employment status by treating students who have supported themselves financially as if they are now dependent on their parents when the biggest form of discrimination on the basis of employment status still remains—students under 25 are deemed to be financially dependent on their parents but young people on the dole are not? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: There are a number of issues that sit in there. To do an equalisation I am advised would cost about $3.5 billion over 4 years and that is not this Government’s priority. 
Lynne Pillay 
: How many students have benefited from the changes to student allowance eligibility? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I am advised that an estimated 36000 students will benefit from the changes to student allowances announced in the 2004 Budget. Over half of all full-time students can now receive an allowance. 
Hon Brian Donnelly 
: Is it not correct that the requirements of the human rights legislation which were the excuse for these changes in policy could have just as readily been met by simply establishing a universal allowance; if so why did the Government not take that course of action—or has the Minister already answered that question? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I think I have answered that particular question when responding to Mr Ogilvy. To have a universal allowance at about the level of the unemployment benefit would cost $3.5 billion over 4 years and that is not the highest priority for this Government at this time. 
Nandor Tanczos 
: Is the Minister aware that the Prime Minister Helen Clark had been lecturing at Auckland University for 2 years before her 25th birthday and is he saying that he believes she was a child dependent on her parents during that time? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I know the Prime Minister’s parents are wonderful and generous people but I should say that at that stage she probably was not heavily reliant on them. 
Bernie Ogilvy 
: How can the Government justify treating married students as if they are financially dependent on their parents when Cabinet papers prepared by the Minister’s own officials point out: “There is a cultural and legal assumption that on marriage a person’s primary emotional and financial dependence transfers from one’s parents to one’s spouse.”; and that this is reflected in other laws that remove guardianship rights and responsibilities upon marriage? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I have not seen that bit of advice but I can inform the member that my experience is that children tend to be dependent on their parents before during and after their marriage. 
Bernie Ogilvy 
: Can the Minister confirm that although the cost of broadening student allowance thresholds is $157 million over 3 years by forcing married students and those who have supported themselves to have their allowance based on their parents’ income the Government is actually saving $82 million over those 3 years which means that the net increase in spending on allowances is more like $75 million—less than the amount the Government is cutting from the scheme; and is that not akin to tertiary highway robbery? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I cannot confirm the figures and no.