SpeechDr PARMJEET PARMAR (National): Thank you Madam Speaker. We have been quite clear since this bill has been reported back from the Education and Workforce Committee that we will be opposing this legislation but then we again took the opportunity during the committee of the whole House—which was just before the third reading now—to ask questions. Those questions were based on concerns that we have in this legislation. I have to acknowledge that the Minister did take calls but he just addressed those questions; he didn't actually answer them. In a way he just defended the position that he has towards this legislation. So if the Minister had actually genuinely looked into resolving those issues that we had raised maybe we would have thought about changing our position.So I'm saying that we are not fully opposed to this legislation. There are a few things that we like in this legislation. Like Jan Tinetti was saying this is about putting all those provisions to do with the education sector—this is the early childhood education sector compulsory and tertiary education—together into this legislation making it easier for people to navigate. We support that but there are provisions in this legislation that are to do with various education sectors that as early childhood education compulsory and tertiary education we don't agree with.First as I have started talking about things that we actually support in this legislation I would like to give another example of a provision that we support. This is about renewing transitional plans. In my view this is actually a good change in this legislation because this is about taking care of people young children where their wellbeing is in question. So there is a requirement of attendance—usual attendance—and there is an exception allowed which is fixed in the current legislation for up to six months. Through this legislation that is going to be flexible.But what is good about this change is that it has to be initiated by a parent or a guardian of the child. So we don't want to see any child or the family of that child being forced to keep the child away from school. So it is initiated by a parent and then of course the school principal has to be involved the Secretary for Education has to be involved and there has to be a medical practitioner involved in this whole process to make sure that this process is not just to keep that child away. When children start school at that very young age of five years we want to make sure that their experience of attending school is really positive. We don't want to give them a fright. We don't want to in a way punish them by making them sit there when their physical or their mental wellbeing doesn't allow them to be in school for that many hours. So that flexibility is something as I said we support.I also want to acknowledge Supplementary Order Paper 544 which was introduced during the committee of the whole House. In that offering NCEA to offshore students was addressed. That was a concern we had from the start. In the context of COVID-19 we know that we have learnt that there are a lot of things that can be done while being away. You don't have to be learning face to face. Distance learning is very much—that is possible. Now we know that a lot of students are not able to come to New Zealand. Export education is a very important sector for New Zealand and we need to see all possible ways to support our economy. Export education is one sector where we definitely need to build on. So this was a concern we had from the start but that has been addressed through the Supplementary Order Paper.Then again the physical force and physical restraint issue that we talked about before. So now we know that the Minister has said that is being addressed but again there is a question of training of teachers. We don't know exactly what kind of resources are going to be available or what kind of training is going to be available for teachers to understand what it actually means and what it will mean for children that have special needs.Now talking about concerns that we have in this legislation during the committee of the whole House I wanted the Minister to address the issue of the early childhood education centre licence approval system that is going to be put through this legislation. One issue that didn't get answered was where there is a criteria of checking that entity's history of providing for the early childhood education sector. So there could be a lot of people that are new players in the sector they want to get into this field and they may not have a history. So I feel that those people will find it really difficult to get into the sector.Our population is growing now—the first time we have 5 million. There are a lot of young families that do need childcare centres in their vicinity or close to their workplace. During this recent recess I with my colleague Barbara Kuriger visited an early childhood education centre. Actually it was the opening of their brand new centre. That was a beautiful centre. This was in the middle of a big workplace a lot of workplaces around it. So that was providing that convenience that parents need when they have children of that age. They can bring those children close to their work drop them in their day-care centre and then while going home pick them up and go home.So these people the providers in the sector they understand what the need is and they understand where that need is. So we should give that freedom. We should give that kind of decision-making ability to our community rather than the Minister having full control deciding where and when somebody can apply for a licence to start an early childhood education centre. So I'm not in favour of that and we on this side as we have said we have concerns about that.The other issue is about the process. During the select committee process three months out of six months of this legislation were when we were in lockdown. Now we are considering this legislation in urgency—the committee of the whole House and third reading. So I fully understand that the Government wants to look like they have done a lot of work in this sector but this is not the way to push through this legislation which the Government themselves have acknowledged is very important legislation in the education sector. So we have concerns about the process as well. Maybe if there was more time—as we have seen through a Supplementary Order Paper the Minister has actually fixed a couple of issues that were raised by us. I believe that if we had more time maybe there was a possibility to work on this legislation where we could have supported this legislation. But at this stage it's not possible for us to support this legislation in its current form.Enrolment zones have been talked about. Yes that remains a concern in this legislation. After the committee of the whole House we are concerned. Again to me it looks like it's the control being taken away from local schools. The control is going to sit with the Secretary for Education which we don't support.Overall this legislation as I said we fully understand that it is consolidating various legislation which have anything to do with various education stages—that is early childhood education compulsory and tertiary. But putting this together we have expressed our concerns about vocational education reform and political reforms that are now part of this legislation. So that was separate legislation and now that is consolidated into this legislation as well. So that is another area of concern. We didn't support that reform and we cannot support those provisions and this legislation just because they have become part of this bigger legislation.So I have expressed our concerns about this legislation. This is a very important area. Education and training is important and it becomes even more important now we know so many people will be losing their jobs. They might be looking at upskilling themselves to find a new kind of job. With the advancement of technology there is a need for people to upskill so education and training should be given more seriousness than the way the Government has dealt with this issue. So I oppose this bill. Thank you.