Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mackey Moana: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:615;Page:11214] 
6.  
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
 to the  
Associate Minister of Education (Tertiary Education) 
: What reports has he received on whether New Zealand universities apply different standards of assessment to Maori students than for non-Maori students? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Associate Minister of Education (Tertiary Education)) 
: 
 I have seen allegations that universities’ double standards on admitting and assessing Maori result in Maori getting jobs they do not actually have the skills to do. I have written to universities about this and the Vice-Chancellors Committee has confirmed that contrary to these accusations “At New Zealand universities the standards of assessment in each discipline are the same for all students.” I have had similar confirmations from the Medical Council of New Zealand the Dental Council of New Zealand the Nursing Council of New Zealand and the Institution of Professional Engineers New Zealand. 
Moana Mackey 
: What reaction has the Minister received about the possibility that New Zealand universities apply different standards of assessment to Maori students? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I will give three quick examples. Phil Meade of Otago University has said: “To have doubts cast on the qualifications of our Maori alumni is an insult to their efforts and achievements and also to the integrity of this university.” The Maori Medical Practitioners Association has pointed out that during examinations students are identified as faceless raceless numbers on bits of paper. They are not identified by ethnicity. Stuart McCutcheon of Victoria University has said: “Special support is not unique to Maori and Pacific students. It is provided for international students students with disabilities and mature students.” In other words students who they believe will benefit and profit by coming to the university. Dr Brash needs to apologise and withdraw his remarks. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Does the Minister support special admission programmes to law and medicine courses such as those at Otago University Auckland University Victoria University and Canterbury University which reserve places for Maori who do not meet the academic standards that non-Maori are required to meet; if so does he acknowledge that such schemes mean that there is one entry standard for Maori and another entry standard for non-Maori? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Yes I do. Let me give an example. One example is the Maori and Pacific Admission Scheme at Auckland University’s Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences which was established to increase the number of Maori and Pacific health professionals to levels relative to New Zealand’s Maori and Pacific population. It is a similar programme to one for mature students. I support that approach because it results in excellent doctors—perhaps for example Mary English the wife of Bill English. 
Hon Bill English 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I want to say something first. I do not appreciate members’ partners or spouses being brought into this argument. I think that the Minister on reflection should withdraw and apologise for that comment. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Speaking to the point of order— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No I want the member to withdraw and apologise. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I withdraw and apologise. 
Hon Bill English 
: I wish to make a personal explanation. The House will be aware that my wife is of Samoan descent but she gained entry to Otago University’s medical school purely on the results of her bursary exams in the seventh form. It is disgraceful that the Government has chosen to bring her into this debate in this manner. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have made my comments about that matter and there that matter rests. 
Nandor Tanczos 
: Does the Minister— 
Ron Mark 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I apologise to the member for interrupting him. It is an interesting question and I ask you to give us some guidance. We are now faced with the problem whereby any student who has gained access to any university course of study by merit and who just happens to be of a particular ethnicity—be it Pacific Island Maori or Asian—is now being cast as a person who got there by special selection. The Hon Bill English is quite able to redress the slur that has been placed across his wife by a personal statement. What assistance will you as Speaker of this House give to any other students who are so slurred but do not happen to have a spouse in Parliament to defend them? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: We have freedom of speech in this Chamber. Members have to reflect on how they use that freedom of speech. Occasionally things are said that I regret and that I think members might regret. In this instance I judged that that was not an appropriate comment to make—I made that judgment. I will look at each case on it merits but I assure members that I want to uphold the rights of members of this House and their personal families. 
Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think that you should go further than that because the danger is that it becomes a tit-for-tat development. I think we have had this before and I think you should make a much stronger statement that you will not tolerate those sorts of comments tacked on to the end of an answer because if you do tolerate them then every time a Government gets desperate it will pull a stunt like that. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: On the face of it the member makes a fair point. I am certainly not defending what just recently happened but there are circumstances in which although the general rule in the House is that we do not bring spouses or partners into it it may actually be relevant to an issue of public interest— 
Opposition Members 
: Oh! 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: The reason I am saying this is that members opposite have done just that on occasions previously—including comments about the Prime Minister’s husband. I suggest to members that before they get too self-righteous on these matters they recognise that sometimes wives husbands and partners of members of Parliament also hold public positions that may legitimately raise matters of interest within Parliament. That is why it is a convention not a Standing Order. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I refer members to Speaker’s ruling 38/1 and Speaker’s ruling 38/2 and ask them to read both of those rulings which go back to 1938 in the one instance and to 1989 in the other. Those are Speakers’ rulings of this Parliament. 
Nandor Tanczos 
: Does the Minister agree that the ability of a doctor to relate to his or her patients is at least as important to being a good doctor as that doctor’s high school grades and is he concerned that only 3 percent of general practitioners are Maori—when Maori make up 15 percent of the population—and what admission programmes is he aware of that address that inequity? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Yes to the first part of the question and yes there are remarkably small numbers of Maori and Pacific Island people who are in those kinds of professions. That is why the member will find spread throughout a number of tertiary institutions admissions programmes for students of those backgrounds. They of course have to meet the same standards as everybody else to pass courses and that is a comment that I think is echoed by Mr Gerry Brownlee when he said that it was not National’s call to cut those kinds of admissions programmes—it never would be he said under a National Government. Of course those comments are completely contradictory to comments made by Dr Brash who said he would cut the money for the programmes.