Simmonds Penny; Davis KelvinPENNY SIMMONDS (National—Invercargill): I'd like to turn now to Part 1 Amendments to principal Act relating to [the] wānanga". This is a groundbreaking piece of legislation but I am so disappointed and particularly for all the people that are here today representing our three wonderful wānanga that they have had this incredibly important part recognising the history of the wānanga sandwiched into a piece of legislation about early childhood education (ECE) police vetting and sex sexuality and gender of board appointments.It is disrespectful to the three wānanga and it is asking for a compromise from the three wānanga. They deserved better. They deserved to have legislation that was absolutely specifically recognising their proud history and recognising what an important part of legislation that this is. So I acknowledge all those from the wānanga that are here and I also thank those—[Interruption]CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! Order! Order! With apologies to the member I am sitting right in the middle of this Chamber and I am now beginning to struggle to hear the member making a contribution. It is every member's right to be heard.PENNY SIMMONDS: Thank you Madam Chair. I think that continues the disrespect of this piece of legislation. We have people here in the gallery today that have given a lifetime of work towards the wānanga. We have people here who were the very inaugural starters—drivers—behind their wānanga. The wānanga should have had legislation specific to them that enabled all parts of what was required to make this important part of legislation work.Instead they have been asked to compromise. They have graciously agreed to that compromise for the sake of getting the main part through of Crown non-Crown entities. But they have had to compromise and every time I read this it feels disrespectful that they will be called "category A wānanga" "category B wānanga" "category C wānanga". The legislation should have been specific to this; it should have allowed the ministry to concentrate only on getting all this right and it should have included appropriate agreed terms—not "category A category B category C wānanga"—and it should have got protection of the term "wānanga". Now I understand why they have accepted the compromise to get the main part through but they should never have been asked to accept that compromise. They should never have been asked to be gracious in that.There are many people who won't understand where the wānanga came from. Obviously that doesn't include anyone that's here in the gallery but there may be many people watching this that don't understand. I'll give the comparison of what was my own institution the Southern Institute of Technology. It started from a Southland technical college. The wānanga had to start from nothing. They started from iwi and individuals mortgaging their own houses to get the wānanga started. They started by the commitment and the passion of people who wanted to make the wānanga work. So they did that right from the start and now again we have been asking them to compromise.So I would like the Minister to tell us why they are being asked to compromise and be called "category A category B category C wānanga"; they have been asked to compromise on not getting parity with the universities and the polytechnic and getting protection of the term "wānanga"; and why they were not allowed to have this as their own piece of legislation not sandwiched in against police vetting for ECE and board appointments of schools; why they didn't allow a single focus on the wānanga to get this right instead of them being asked to compromise again. Thank you Madam Chair.Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Associate Minister of Education (Māori Education)): Thank you Madam Chair and I thank the member for her crocodile tears. First of all I would like to acknowledge the three wānanga: Te Wānanga o Raukawa Te Wānanga o Aotearoa and Te Whare Wānanga o Awanuiārangi. I would like to acknowledge the aspirations of the tūpuna and the iwi behind those wānanga. The member was right with her contribution that the wānanga did have to start up from nothing but they are by Māori for Māori institutions.The short answer to her question is that we worked with the wānanga. This is what they wanted. The kiko or the substance of the bill—the framework—is what's most important and it will give wānanga time to actually develop those terms so that there can be the appropriate consultation on the terms that they want. But what's most important is the substance of this part that gives life to the aspirations of the iwi and the tūpuna behind all the wānanga."