Salesa JennyJENNY SALESA (Labour—Manukau East): Thank you so much for this opportunity to make a contribution on the Education (Update) Amendment Bill. I would like to make a contribution that focuses initially on clause 4 inserting new section 1A(4) in the Education Act 1989 which continues on from the honourable Minister of Education's comments on consultation. New section 1A(4) states that Before issuing a statement under this section the Minister must consult with those stakeholders in the early childhood and compulsory education sectors that he or she considers ought to be consulted." One of the strongest most persuasive submissions that the Education and Science Committee heard was from the Children's Commissioner Andrew Becroft and what he told us was that children have not been consulted on this legislation. He stated: "The education system exists for children." Submissions on this particular bill—he said that the most important stakeholders that this bill will affect are our children. Therefore they should be consulted and the best interests of our children should be taken into account. He came with a submission that included this "STOP" sign. He told us that as a select committee we should stop with this bill consult our children and then come back to ensure that the voices of the children are heard. I heard what the honourable Minister Hekia Parata said—that there were one or two student representatives on boards—but there was no direct consultation with actual children otherwise the Children's Commissioner would have told us that the children's voices had actually been consulted. The Post Primary Teachers' Association and many other submitters also told us that the children's voices are not heard even within this. Kaylene Macnee and Main Road School also made submissions along these lines. One of the submitters whose name is Joanna Fissenden said that particular groups should be mandatory—before we go implementing changes to the Education Act we should consult with particular groups including children and young people children with disabilities Māori and Pasifika children parents and whānau and proprietors of State integrated schools. These folks were not consulted. But the point that I am trying to make is that the voices of our children are not even being heard before we go about making the largest changes to this legislation in over 30 years. Some of the submitters also told us that the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child which we as a country have signed up to is not even considered in this bill. The United Kingdom and the United States both include the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child as well as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in their education legislation. We do not even do that in this particular bill. The joint submission from YouthLaw Aotearoa IHC and Action for Children and Youth Aotearoa told us that we should include a separate purpose statement in this bill that will provide all of us with useful guidance. We know that we have signed up to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child but late last year the UN committee—pursuant to article 12 of the convention—made repeated calls for us to uphold the rights of our children especially our children who are marginalised. It also named Māori and Pacific children amongst those. When we do not include the rights of all children we should really question what we are doing here in passing legislation in haste that does not actually address all of our children. I put it to the Minister that she has the Education Council. In my opinion the Minister has not listened to the majority of the 216 submissions because when we look at the legislation that we have in front of us and compare it with the form of the legislation before it went through the select committee there are some changes but very few changes. I will give an example. When you look at what the Education Council recommended to the honourable Minister it said that the Minister should include this: "to provide learning experiences which support children and young people to reach their potential and a system which aims to achieve equitable outcomes for all;". The Minister just explained that we do not necessarily need to have equitable outcomes—or indeed all children—in the legislation but why not? Why do we not ensure that there is an equitable outcome for all of our children? Why not? This Government would have us believe that when it puts aside a measly $92 per student per year to follow the most at-risk kids apparently that deals with equity and makes it so that all children across all of New Zealand should have equity of outcome. Inequality is an issue that has not been addressed under this Government. In fact it has gotten worse. When we look at say students in areas like South Auckland which I represent we know that the majority of the schools in South Auckland are low decile—decile 1 to decile 3 in fact. The majority of Pacific students—close to 70 percent of Pacific students—attend decile 1 to decile 3 schools. To me it is a bit of a farce that this Government would say that putting aside $92 per student per year is somehow going to make outcomes more equal for all students—$92 does not even buy the whole set of a uniform. The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): I am just looking at the themes for the member. Equity funding is not part of this so can you just concentrate on the theme. JENNY SALESA: Thank you Mr Chairman. I will move on to new section 1A(3) inserted by clause 4. It sets out the objectives of the education system. A lot of the submissions said that the achievement and learning of children and young people should be central in this particular bill. The City of Manukau Education Trust in Auckland proposed that we should have a fourth objective. I do not see this fourth objective in the new bill. It recommended that we "work towards equity of outcomes across ethnicities genders and socio-economic groups at all levels of the system for education and learning." This is not currently covered. The New Zealand Educational Institute stated in its submission that the objectives should also include equity. I heard the Minister say earlier on that equity is not included but again I ask why not. Why is equity not included in the wording of the bill? It should be. Thank you."