Turner Judy: Address in Reply 
Turner Judy: Address in Reply 
[Volume:628;Page:428] 
JUDY TURNER (Deputy Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I begin by adding my congratulations to the Hon Margaret Wilson who was elected as Speaker and to yourself Mr Assistant Speaker and to the others who have been elected in supporting roles to the office of Speaker. I also congratulate the many new MPs on their election and on some very excellent maiden speeches which I have enjoyed immensely and been inspired by. I reflect also on the recent election which saw a changing of the guard in the East Coast electorate as our long-serving MP Janet Mackey retired and National’s Anne Tolley received the mandate to take up the baton. I congratulate her and offer my support as an extra hand to the plough in my capacity as a list MP within that electorate. Janet Mackey’s valedictory speech made deliberate reference to the inadequate resourcing of MPs who serve large electorates like the East Coast. Let me assure Anne Tolley that I will support any move to see that issue reconsidered in her favour. 
The East Coast is a huge and diverse electorate which has pockets of extreme deprivation but is loaded with industry and potential that is yet to be tapped. I do not believe that the current resourcing of out-of-Parliament allowances gives the people of the East Coast the access they need and deserve. With that in mind I take a moment to honour Janet Mackey who supplied additional resources out of her own pocket so that East Coasters were not short-changed. I also thank the other candidates for the East Coast electorate for the way they played the campaign—in particular Moana Mackey and Catherine Delahunty for helping to make this campaign at times even fun. I thank my electorate team which continued to support my candidacy and United Future. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Are any boys allowed to run a campaign up there? 
JUDY TURNER 
: No women only. My contribution to this debate will focus on those parts of the Speech from the Throne that relate to the intentions of the Government in this 48th Parliament with regard to education. As a primary trained teacher who spent some of her most enjoyable teaching years in the new entrant classes I think the Government’s move towards a 1:15 teacher-pupil ratio in new entrant classes is an extremely positive one. It will be welcomed by all those who work in that specialised area of teaching. 
The myriad of essential skills that are important prerequisites to literacy and numeracy success are all covered intensely at that level. However what is not clear about this announcement is how this extra funding will be applied to junior classes in rural schools that include new entrants along with year 1 2 and 3 students. The additional challenges that rural schools face are well documented and in particular I bring to the Minister’s attention the plight of teaching principals who are the unsung heroes of the primary school sector. The burgeoning compliance demands are usually the very first complaint one hears about when visiting those schools. The amount of data requested by the ministry on a weekly basis is out of control. For teaching principals that is an outrageous requirement and it takes up way too much of their precious non-contact time. 
I am interested that this Government wants to have “all 15 to 19-year-olds engaged in some sort of work training or other income-generating activity”. That is a noble enough goal but if the Government is serious about this and I surely hope it is I challenge it to review the current provisions around the use of the independent youth benefit. The process by which a young person individuates from his or her parents has traditionally been fraught with difficulty. So it is not surprising that some of today’s young people like many before them feel that the constraints of living at home are unbearable. However unlike previous generations today’s youth can make a case to a teacher social worker or counsellor and move in with a boyfriend—on a benefit. That benefit allows young people to live away from home for reasons that are often dealt with very subjectively. Young people before they have even left school are introduced to welfarism. 
I well remember a letter I received in the last Parliament from a constituent whose daughter arrived home in a teacher’s car announced she was moving out packed her bags and left. No one had consulted the parents about the claims she had made. No one seemed to have any ongoing concerns about the drug dealing that was part of the flatting environment she was assisted into and no one questioned why if her relationship with her parents was so terrible she went home for dinner most nights did her laundry at home and spent most of every weekend at her parents’ home. Young people do need to be encouraged to develop independent life choices but that does not have to include State-funded isolation from their families. There are situations where young people do need to be supported to leave home but where the State feels the need to intervene so dramatically in the life of a family then surely it should maintain responsibility for the out-working of that decision with regard to the safety and suitability of the accommodation that is chosen. 
The additional Modern Apprenticeships and opportunities that currently exist for those with trade and technical skills means that there is no excuse for the Government to be party to behaviour that sends the wrong messages and is the starting place for unconstructive habits in our young people. In the matter of education the Speech from the Throne included an acknowledgment of the growing concern among businesses that young people emerging from education and training were still insufficiently prepared for the labour market. United Future believes that there are two contributing factors. The first as the Speech from the Throne alluded is the need to line up tertiary education with the job market so that what is on offer is of high quality and is relevant. Second we believe that employment competence is not just the result of acquiring sufficient information; we believe it is also about developing the relational skills and the work ethic that make one employable. 
The Speech from the Throne railed against poorly designed courses and called for a change in emphasis from valuing participation in favour of quality qualifications. Although much fun is being poked at some of these questionable courses can I please sound a voice of caution that we do not walk away from second-chance education. For those who have experienced only disappointment and failure in educational environments participation can be an insurmountable hurdle if it is accompanied by seemingly unattainable standards. Participation is a very acceptable goal as long as students having begun to participate are then encouraged to move on into more robust fields of study. I know that there has been lots of criticism about the wananga and that it has been considered a key culprit in this. But I am also very aware anecdotally of some wonderful stories of people who would never have become involved in education through any other means and have since gone on to get very reputable qualifications although they began that process in some courses that were geared specifically towards encouraging positive participation. I would be very concerned if we start to undermine that important aspect of second-chance education. 
I am excited about the opportunity to make a difference that United Future has been offered. It is what we have always said we were about. We are a little bit—if I am honest—gobsmacked at the opportunity that came our way. It was not what we anticipated would be the result after the election but we are more than happy to now be part of working with this Government to achieve some very noble goals. I welcome the Maori Party to this Parliament. It is exciting that it is here. I believe its people are long overdue for representation in this way and I look forward to working with it. Kia ora katoa.