Sepuloni Carmel: Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Sepuloni Carmel: Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:9408] 
CARMEL SEPULONI (Labour) 
: 
 I will continue with my speech on Part 2 of the Student Loan Scheme (Exemptions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Amendment Bill. I was saying that Part 2 basically makes sure that there is consistency with regard to what is in Part 1. We were discussing the importance of student loans for particular groups in our society and the need to ensure moving forward that those groups have access to student loans because of the fact that unfortunately not every member of this society has parents who can afford to pay for their tertiary studies. We need to make sure that particular groups in society have equal opportunity to access quality tertiary educational opportunities. That is what we were touching on. 
Forgive me Mr Chairperson if I cannot do this but I want to check whether I can put something from Part 1 to the Minister. You are shaking your head; OK then I will not go there. 
We talked earlier about our own experiences with student loans at university and I talked about the fact that not only did I spend 11 years at the University of Auckland but I spent it working and studying there so I have had a lot of experience with Maori and Pacific students and also with students who are sole parents. We discussed the fact that for many of those students their time at university does not necessarily fit in the 3-year or 4-year degree time frame or whatever time their programme was meant to take. In fact I think that when I was at the University of Auckland there was some research done on the fact that quite often not just Maori and Pacific students but students in general struggled to finish their degrees within the time periods that were set. There are good reasons for that. I alluded to the fact that for some students the tertiary environment and the university environment in particular can be quite foreign given that some students come from families where they are the first to go on to study at a university. It is important that we take that into consideration. 
I heard one member from the other side of the Chamber in a speech about 2 years ago talk about his own experience at university. He went on to do a PhD but he said that it took him longer than 3 years to complete the initial BA. If he had taken out a student loan—even though I know that during his time he did not need to access a loan because in his day he was actually paid to attend university—then that would not have been a waste of money because that particular member although taking I think 5 years to complete a 3-year BA degree did go on to do a master’s degree and later a PhD. So moving forward we need to make sure that the Government does not narrow the criteria with regard to student loans and it needs to make sure that it does not limit access to the opportunities that tertiary education has to offer. 
When Labour was in Government for the previous 9 years it placed a concerted effort on making sure that it lifted the tertiary participation rate of particular groups—on making sure that it improved the numbers of Maori going through to higher level tertiary education and on doubling the number of Pacific people who were achieving bachelor degree qualifications. That is something that we on this side of the Chamber hope that the Government will continue to support. We hope that it continues to invest in tertiary education and continues to support the participation of groups that have been under-represented in higher-level tertiary education in the past. 
Unfortunately we have not seen any signals from the Government with regard to that. Not only has it slashed the important funding that went to adult and community education but it has refused over the last year and a half to lift the caps on the numbers of people being able to access universities and polytechnics at a time when we know that employment is scarce. So when there are all these young people—I think there is something like a 30.8 percent youth unemployment rate for Maori and a 29.8 percent youth unemployment rate for Pacific people—out there searching for opportunities to upskill and train this Government has shut things down for them. I think that is actually abhorrent. Not only do they not have opportunities for employment but also this Government is not supporting them with opportunities for going on to training or upskilling. At the end of the day that will be detrimental not only for those individuals but also for their communities. In the future in the long term it will be quite detrimental to this country because we know that future estimates of the demographics show us that down the track a large proportion of the population will be Maori and Pacific. Ageing Pakeha will be reliant on a young Maori and Pacific working base being able to support them. 
Those are just some of the issues that have come up in respect of this bill and of what the Government is proposing. It is not just the bill in front of us that concerns us; it is the wider discussions that are taking place. It is the public statements that the Prime Minister and the tertiary education Minister are out there making. Those statements are of concern for members on this side of the Chamber because we are concerned about heading down a track where the Government will make tertiary education less accessible for some groups—the groups for whom we have supported an increase in the numbers participating in tertiary education. We are very concerned that the Government will be basically cutting them off. 
Part 2 agreed to.