Turei Metiria: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTurei Metiria: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 29 January 2014. Volume:696;Page:15610. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]3.METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) to thePrime Minister: Does he stand by his statement yesterday that “giving the odd kid a lunch. That is not actually going to fix the problem. What will fix the problem is paying $50000 to a world-class principal to go in and fix up a school that is failing those kids”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): I stand by my full statement which began with: “When it comes to education we will not say the answer to fixing the whole problem of the education system is giving the odd kid a lunch.”Metiria Turei: Is the Prime Minister saying with his statement to the country that he believes that the main cause of underachievement is that the principals and teachers in lower-decile schools where underachievement is concentrated are no good at their job and are failing their pupils?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: What I am saying is that the single-biggest thing we can do to help young New Zealanders of all backgrounds is have a world-class education system. What I am also saying is that it is actually quite difficult sometimes to attract the very best principals to small underperforming schools and one of the biggest changes we can make is to pay a premium of $50000 to attract one of those world-class principals to those schools. I personally happen to think that if you can put a fabulous principal in charge of a school and fantastic teachers in front of those children you are much more likely to make a big difference to them than by giving them lunch.Metiria Turei: Does the Prime Minister accept the Programme for International Student Assessment finding that family and out-of-school factors like being well fed and well housed accounts for more than 75 percent of the difference between high and low-performing New Zealand schools?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I prefer to rely on AndreasSchleicher who is actually the architect of the Programme for International Student Assessment. This is his exact quote when he spoke to the New Zealand media not so long ago onNine to Noon: “Another part of the education that is actually underperformance in New Zealand isn’t actually all about poor kids in poor neighbourhoods. You know there are actually many kids in more advantaged neighbourhoods where you can see performance challenges.” I think the reality is that there are two factors that make a big difference to children’s ability to learn at school. One is the home they come from and the second is ultimately the teachers and the principals who are in front of those kids. We cannot always potentially change one of those factors but we can certainly heavily influence the other. Secondly the Government provides enormous support to those at-risk families. That included this Government borrowing tens of billions of dollars through the worst of the recession to support the most at-risk families in New Zealand.Metiria Turei: What then is his response to the Principals’ Federation some of whose members would benefit from his policy who have praised the Greens school hub plan saying that out-of-school influences like decent food have by far the biggest influence on underachievement?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I suppose the way to respond to that is to quote the Principals’ Federation which said: “It’s hard for me to say but it’s a pretty damned impressive amount. It’s a huge amount of new money and I’ve never seen such a transformation of ideas and discussion into policy and money in my life.” Sounds to me like they are backing the National Party.Metiria Turei: Does the Prime Minister not understand that it is impossible to fix “underperformance” simply by helicoptering in 20 high-paid principals when he knows that 75 percent of the influence on underachievement is family background and out of those principals’ control?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: First I think the member is just plain wrong. Second I think the member is not doing justice to that very fine policy from the National Party. It is not 20 change principals; it is actually 100 over a period of time—5 years—and it is also 5000 lead teachers. It is a large number of executive principals and expert teachers. It is $150 million dollars per year to lift the performance of all of our schools and principals across the country. Let us be blunt: I came from a State house and a solo mother. Ihappened to go to a world-class school with world-class teachers and I am now the Prime Minister of New Zealand. Frankly I think that made a bigger difference—Mr SPEAKER: Order!Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. With respect the Prime Minister had ample time to answer that question without trying to show—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Can the member just come to the point of his point of order?Rt Hon Winston Peters: The point is very very clear—as daylight. He has had far too long to answer the question and I am asking you to stop him.Mr SPEAKER: Order! And if the member wants the privilege of asking question No. 4 in the House he will allow me to run question time. It was quite a lengthy question that was asked and I thought the Prime Minister was attempting to genuinely answer the question. I will decide when I think a Minister be it a Prime Minister or any other has spoken for too long in his answer not the Rt Hon Winston Peters.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You are surely not suggesting that I do not have the right to raise a point of order about the length of question are you?Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. No I am not suggesting that but I am telling the member—it is not a suggestion—that I will ultimately decide. The member can certainly raise the point of order—Rt Hon Winston Peters: Thank you for that.Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am on my feet. I will ultimately decide when I think an answer has gone on too long and I have done that on two or three occasions already in this question time.Metiria Turei: If the 1970s welfare State was so good to the Prime Minister when he was a child will he consider reviving some of the core policies that were in place at that time such as secure State housing a universal child benefit and genuinely free public education to every child now; if he will not why does he believe that today’s kids are not entitled to the same support he had when he was a child?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No.Metiria Turei: Is the Prime Minister concerned that the chance of people like him escaping poverty and doing well has become close to impossible under his watch when the percentage of poorer children who are achieving at the highest levels has now dropped from 6 percent in 2009 to just 4 percent in 2012?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I am pleased that yesterday I described the Opposition as deluded because the member has absolutely demonstrated that. Over the course of the last 5 years of this National Government we have poured enormous resources into supporting the most at need. We have lifted I think the resources going into education which is the single biggest factor to help young New Zealanders. To make the case that somebody could go to school today—somebody say 15 years of age in year 11 who has spent the last 5 years at school under a National-led Government—and be condemned to never doing well because they grew up in a poor household shows how out of touch that member is.Metiria Turei: When will the Prime Minister drop his inequality denial and admit that his policies are creating a growing class of people who sit at the bottom of the most unequal education system in the developed world?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Again the member is just completely and utterly wrong. She wants to be in denial but the penultimate findings in this area done by the Ministry of Social Development—they are basically the findings of Mr Perry—have shown that actually income inequality has not been widening in the last 10 years; it has been very consistent over the last 10 years. If the member wants to cut and paste information sothat she can mislead her supporters she is welcome to do so but in fact income inequality is not growing in New Zealand.