Wong Pansy: Education (Export Education Levy) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Wong Pansy: Education (Export Education Levy) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:14757] 
PANSY WONG (National) 
: 
 Well I have to say that the Hon Bill English absolutely put his finger on the pulse. Nobody can trust this Labour Government or especially this so-called Minister of Education. I think that the U-turns the subtle movements and the way the Minister rode roughshod over the industry and particularly over the export education sector is absolutely unprecedented. I would call on the Green Party members who always claim they have principles and that they support the rule of law to re-look at this situation. Otherwise I totally accept what my colleague Dr Wayne Mapp has pointed out—that the Greens never respect the rule of law. This action of theirs would confirm that. 
I also make this point: why should there be any levy funds left unspent on the day that this legislation comes into force? There are a few hundred thousand dollars left in the first six-monthly accounts of the export education levy. That is very concerning because a levy we are told is supposedly different from a tax. When the Government taxes people it is not sure what the money will be spent on. But the export education levy was meant to be imposed on the institutions for specific purposes. I think the Committee appreciates the fact that the Hon Brian Donnelly gave us a very detailed and good account of the history of the export education levy. The Minister did not bother to adhere to the rule of law in the process of getting the industry’s agreement to impose the levy. Then in the first year of the levy’s existence the Government reported a surplus. After reporting that surplus the Labour Government has introduced this legislation to the House in order to bring in another provision just in case the gatekeeper the New Zealand Qualifications Authority fails to do its job again and another college collapses. This additional levy would then be used for that purpose. 
The only other problem I have—and I think the Minister should take a call to assure the public on this—is that I would like to know whether with regard to all the existing private education providers the New Zealand Qualifications Authority has established that all of them are in a sound financial position. If not this levy is in effect retrospective because some educational institutions will be called upon once again to pay up for institutions that are already in existence and that are accredited and supposedly audited and monitored by the New Zealand Qualifications Authority. If such an institution goes into liquidation again it will mean that any new institution that has just joined the sector and the good performers and providers in the sector will be called upon to bail out an institution that was previously approved and accredited by the New Zealand Qualifications Authority. 
Although we were told by the Minister that he has removed part of this bill because he agrees with New Zealand First that it should not impose any retrospective provision I am afraid the Hon Brian Donnelly may not have done the whole deal—he may have just done part of the job. Part 2 certainly gives a very clear indication that it is retrospective. Not only can the existing levy be used for different purposes but we have not been reassured by the Minister or by the New Zealand Qualifications Authority that none of the existing institutions will fall over.