Sepuloni Carmel: Education (Polytechnics) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Sepuloni Carmel: Education (Polytechnics) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:659;Page:8524] 
CARMEL SEPULONI (Labour) 
: 
 I want to point out that the Education (Polytechnics) Amendment Bill really is a signal of the steep slope down which we are going with regard to representation. One thing that has not been talked about so far—and I want to take this angle a little bit—is Pacific representation because that is part of the reason I am here. Before I even get to that I want to acknowledge one of our Pacific members on the Manukau Institute of Technology Council who recently passed away. Nancy Sheehan was 48 years old a mother and a great woman and she was one of our Pacific representatives on the Manukau Institute of Technology Council. Now we have only one Pacific representative on that council but thank goodness we still have one. 
I point out that representation is important across the board whether it be Maori representation union representation student representation or staff representation. But for us the issue is about having fair representation for Pacific people in areas where we have high numbers of Pacific people. This bill effectively takes away the likelihood of fair representation happening. We know that the number of councillors has been cut down from 20 members to 12 members and then to eight members and we know that half of those members will be appointed by the Minister for Tertiary Education. We also know that we cannot trust the Minister to make sure that any of her appointees are actually Pacific people whether or not the polytech is like Manukau Institute of Technology Unitec or Auckland University of Technology—the latter institution is not counted in this instance—located where there are large numbers of Pacific people. We cannot trust the Minister to think to make sure one of her appointees is a Pacific person. Even if the Minister was to appoint a Pacific person I think the Pacific community would largely agree that the person she appoints would not be representative of us or that the person would not be the right person to represent us. I just wanted to point that out. 
The scary thing about this legislation is that the issue it raises is not just about representation on the polytechnic councils; it is about where else we might lose representation moving forward. Already I have heard through the grapevine that some moves are being made to take away the representation that Maori and Pacific people have in Creative New Zealand. The Government wants to change the legislation so that Maori and Pacific people will no longer have that representation. We have already seen earlier this year the National Government decide that Maori will not have representation on the super-city council. This issue will be a recurring one; we will see it over and over again. I am very concerned about it as a Pacific person and as a person who represents Pacific people and we should all be worried about it. 
Te Ururoa Flavell said earlier that we cannot rely on clauses that state representation is “desirable”. I have seen the Maori Party amendment and I cannot say that the amendment is bad; the amendment being put forward by the Maori Party is actually OK. But I cannot understand why the Maori Party still had to vote for the bill when we discussed it last week despite the fact that everything that was being said by the Maori Party and by Labour was opposed to what this bill suggests. It is not just about denying Maori representation; it actually removes the legislative right for Maori to have representation. Maori already had it but this bill actually takes it away. The Maori Party could have said it did not support the bill and still put up an amendment. I was confused and really disappointed last week because the member’s speech went along the lines of saying the same things that Labour was saying with regard to what Maori should be guaranteed under the Treaty but then it got to the end and went “whammo”; the member said the Maori Party supported the bill despite all of that. Now that was rather confusing to me and I have not heard anything today from the member Te Ururoa Flavell the same member who spoke on the matter last week to convince me that what he was discussing last week made any sense at the end of the day. I just wanted to point that out. 
I go back to the issue of representation. Last week Sir Roger Douglas also stood up in the House and said students and staff should not have any role in the governance of polytechnics. Considering that they are two of the largest stakeholders particularly students I cannot understand why he would think that they need to be excluded. But he obviously shares that sentiment with the Minister for Tertiary Education because she is pushing for that. She says that students staff and all the other groups that I have already pointed to do not need to have a voice. Sir Roger Douglas also pointed that out last week. Obviously we can see why they support the measure. But as far as we are concerned students and staff are key stakeholder groups and should have a say on what happens in their local polytechnics. 
The National Government seems to want to reframe what polytechnics are about in the first place. Polytechnics were set up to serve the communities in which they are based and therefore it makes a lot of common sense that the people in those communities should have a say on how polytechnics are run. But by doing this the Government is effectively saying that is no longer the purpose of polytechnics. We on the Opposition side of the Chamber wonder what the Minister thinks the purpose of polytechnics is now if that is what she is doing. She is taking away representation. She is taking away the opportunity of local people to have a say in their local polytechs. Therefore I wish the Minister would stand up and clarify the National Government’s new direction for polytechnics and clarify their new role in this time and space now that National is in Government. We seem to be missing that clarification. We have not had an explanation of that new direction because the Minister continues to fill in her Christmas cards and give her apologies to everyone whom she has upset during the year. 
The Labour spokesperson on tertiary education Maryan Street has put up a number of amendments in respect of this bill. I hope that the National Government takes the amendments seriously and actually looks at them rather than just pushing them aside and not even looking at what is being suggested. The National Government could take on board a lot of the wise wise suggestions that our spokesperson on tertiary education has made. She has pointed out that we need to have more than eight people on the councils. Eight members are not enough and having four appointed by the Minister leaves far too much power in the hands of the Minister over the decisions that are made and the direction that a polytechnic takes. 
It has been put to the Minister that we query why she feels she needs to have so much control over what happens in the polytechnics. The National members have pointed out that this measure will allow the Government to intervene more rapidly when polytechnics have issues with regard to their financial or educational performance but the concern we have is that the Minister will not stop there. Effectively she will be denying the right of local people the people who have some stake in what happens in their local polytechnics to guide the direction of education that occurs in their area. 
After we have had to listen to this Government go on and on about how the previous Labour Government was a nanny State and tried to tell everyone what to do we are concerned that this Minister is trying to intervene and take full control over what happens in our polytechnics. This seems to be in complete contrast with what this Government originally said it would do: that things would come down to individual responsibility; that people would have the right to make up their own minds about things. Now the Minister is intervening here and taking the lion’s share of control over what will happen in our polytechnics. 
I will conclude there. I have made my point about representation. I think that the National Government needs to take seriously the amendments put up by the Hon Maryan Street and the Maori Party. Thank you.