Carter Chris: Budget Debate 
Carter Chris: Budget Debate 
[Volume:663;Page:11339] 
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Labour—Te Atatu) 
: 
 I rise to criticise this Budget. Listening to the previous speaker the Hon Judith Collins I thought that she seemed to spend more time talking about her opponent Mr Clayton Cosgrove than she did about the details in the Budget. 
It was very interesting to hear that member talk about the importance of science and research. I could not help thinking as she was trumpeting the miserly amount that was in the Budget for that area that it was a belated recognition that science and innovation are the only ways that we will lift New Zealand industries to make them even more competitive internationally. The $750 million in the Fast Forward Fund was the very first thing the National Government cut when it was elected to Government. So much for the Government’s commitment to science! The 10 to 15 percent tax credit that companies could get for research and development was gone as well of course. A little bit of it has come back but it is nothing compared to what the previous Labour Government had in place. 
Today we heard in question time the Minister of Education trumpeting extra spending for education. She was skiting about a 4 percent increase in the operations grant. I have to say that in 2008 when I was the Minister of Education there was a 5 percent operations grant increase. What they did not get then and what they are getting now is death by a thousand cuts. 
Let us just review some of the programmes in education that have been cut putting aside that skiting about the 4 percent. We could talk about the $400 million that has been plucked out of early childhood education. The Minister of Police gave a speech a couple of minutes ago crowing about the extra police officers. She did not mention that the Labour-led Government over 9 years put in 2000 extra police officers. Police officers of course are not the only answer to crime; we have to address the causes of crime. Almost all of the young men who are in our jails would have had a bad educational start right from the beginning. In Counties-Manukau which the previous speaker was talking about only 23 percent of preschoolers go to early childhood education. That might involve one afternoon a week for an hour at the local church hall so the quality of education of even those 23 percent who are attending early childhood education before they enter primary education is of very variable quality. 
The National-led Government has cut out $400 million from the early childhood education budget. That was the very thing that would address a lifetime of crime—getting those kids off to a good start so that they have educational success and so that they are literate and skilled. Every profile of young and not-so-young people in jail shows the vast majority had a very poor education. Many of them are illiterate or only semi-literate. The failure in the education system is partly to blame for a lifetime of crime. That failure is compounded by poor homes poor nutrition and bad life experiences. Those are all cumulative things that are hard to deal with. They are not solved by a few extra police officers; they are solved by investing in quality social services and in quality education. 
Four hundred million dollars has been taken out of early childhood education. I recall the last election campaign in 2008 where the then Opposition spokesperson on education fronted up at many meetings with me for the New Zealand Educational Institute and she talked about the failure of 20 percent of our students—actually it is about 18 percent and falling. It is about a good start and about programmes in schools that address literacy not all the nonsense about national standards. How will a national standard catch a kid who is failing? Where are the extra resources in education that will lift a child who is failing in literacy or numeracy? Already in schools— 
Hon Georgina te Heuheu 
: Leave them to fail that’s what that Government did. 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: I can hear the Associate Minister of Maori Affairs going on about education failure. She of all people should know that far too many young Maori in our country are not succeeding in education. If we went into any school any kura or any kohanga reo in this country and asked the teachers there to tell us which kids are not succeeding instantly they would be able to tell us. They have already identified them. They already know who those children are. A national standard will not improve that knowledge; teachers already know. What those teachers need is extra resources for extra staff to work one-on-one in small groups to lift those children up. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: I am sorry that I have only about 5 minutes remaining. I would like about 25 minutes because I have a lot to say tonight. I have had about 1½ hours to reflect on my first 5-minute contribution before dinner. 
I was inspired by the member who spoke before me Judith Collins the Minister of Police. I know she said a lot about my colleague Clayton Cosgrove because she has a special affection for him but also she made reference to many interesting points that are very good points to rebut. One of them was her comment that her Government has a commitment to science. I mulled over the irony of that statement because I was talking about education before the dinner break. One of the first things that the Minister’s colleague Mrs Tolley did as Minister of Education was to get rid of the science advisers in schools. Science it seems for the Minister of Education at least does not count. Science advisers physical education advisers and music advisers are all out. Mrs Tolley argued in this House that she wanted school advisers to focus just on numeracy and literacy because we were failing in those. Strangely enough she is not too good in numeracy herself. She got her figures wrong yesterday and had to apologise. 
In the OECD rankings of the developed countries—the so-called PISA or Programme for International Student Assessment scores—we come first in the English-speaking world. Our schools are very successful internationally. New Zealand teachers are first-rate educators and New Zealand learners in our schools are doing very well. So why should we have these national standards? I talked a little bit about them before. On the issue of science advisers we have heard about the Government’s commitment to science. Science advisers and physical education advisers are out and art is out—it does not count. We will not have a test we are told for national standards. Australia the UK and the US have tests and they are getting rid of them now. Half of the primary schools in Britain are on strike over doing tests because as the educators there quite rightly say those tests are a farce. They actually hinder education; they do not help it. 
Mrs Tolley has come up with what she calls OTJ—objective teacher judgment. It seems now that our new national standards—which we have spent millions developing and for which teachers have been forced to attend numerous professional development courses—have boiled down to objective teacher judgment. In other words a teacher sitting in his or her classroom doing the school report will decide whether a child is a pass a fail or average. There will be no moderation between classrooms in a school. There will be no moderation between schools in Auckland. There will be no moderation between schools in Auckland and Otago. There will be absolutely no criteria for comparing a teacher in a classroom in west Auckland who says that Judith Collins aged 7 has passed. There will be absolutely no comparative objective comparison between one classroom and another. It is to be objective teacher judgment. What a farce! All of the money that has been spent to justify a slogan that was used in an election campaign by National and the $250 that every school has had to find to cover a reliever for a teacher who is obliged to go to a professional development course on national standards boils down to objective teacher judgment. What a joke! 
I hope that viewers who are watching Parliament tonight had a chance to see TV3’s news tonight. In the first item we heard about the Highwater incident when John Key said he did not own a vineyard but was caught on tape saying that he did. I guess in a way that summarises this Budget. It is all about spin. It is all about delusion. My colleague Jim Anderton earlier in the Budget debate described it as not the Robin Hood Budget—Robin Hood took from the rich and gave to the poor—but the Sheriff of Nottingham Budget: the Budget that takes from the poor and the middle class and gives to the rich. 
It is an illusion to say that it is a fair Budget. It is an illusion to say it is a progressive Budget. It is an illusion to say that it is a Budget for New Zealand and an investment for the future. Judith Collins talked about National finally—finally—recognising that science and innovation and investment in research are really important. I remind viewers listeners and colleagues here in the Chamber that $750 million for the Fast Forward Fund was done away with as soon as National was elected to office. The tax credit for research and development of 10 to 15 percent was done away with. This Budget is not an investment for New Zealand’s future. It is about trying to buy votes and it will not work.