Stanford Erica; Rurawhe AdrianERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. I am stoked to be here." is what I would say if I was indeed at a party but I am not at a party; I'm in the House so I will say that I am very pleased to speak on the Education (Teaching Council of Aotearoa New Zealand) Amendment Bill at its third reading.One of the things that I would like to start off by saying is that there has been quite vigorous debate over this bill through all of the three readings and I have spoken at all three of them. The one thing though that I would like to say is that we agree on both sides of this House about one thing and that is how much we all value teachers. We all value the incredible job that they do going above and beyond their regular duties to look after our kids to make sure that our kids get the best start in life. I spend a lot of time in schools in my electorate talking to teachers and listening to their stories: the amount of extra work that they do with special needs kids with priority learners with high-needs learners and with gifted students. We absolutely value that work that they do especially the work that they do above and beyond.But the question has always been throughout this debate—and the question remains—what is the need for this bill? Has that need been established? We're still asking these questions with the bill as it stands today at the third reading. All this Government has said is that the teachers want it. That's their first point. Their second point was that we need a council with teachers on it. Their third point was independence and their fourth point made by Mark Patterson today was that it would encourage more students into teaching. Well let's just take those things one by one because they're still very relevant with the bill as it stands now.The teachers want this: as I mentioned I've been to speak to many many teachers in many schools throughout my electorate—in fact all schools. I note that Jenny Salesa said today that she's heard from many teachers who have said that this is what they want. I have heard from teachers and they've got a lot of concerns. One of those concerns is their pay. They say to me that they don't want $2.8 billion spent on the fees-free policy. They would rather that they were better paid. There's a range of things that they've said to me when I've been out but one of those things is not: "Hey by the way we'd actually quite like you guys to change the name of the Education Council. That would be just great if you could do that for us." They've never once mentioned that—not in a single visit. And I don't think any of my colleagues—if I can get some nods around—have ever heard that from any of the teachers they've ever visited. Not one. They've got many valid concerns but that ain't one of them.Another thing that they've never said to me is that "We want to be able to elect our own people on to this council". Never said it—not a concern. So for all—Marja Lubeck: You weren't listening.ERICA STANFORD: I'm not listening? I've been to every single school in my electorate and I've spoken to hundreds of teachers and not one of them has ever said that. It's all very well for the members opposite to get up and say that they've heard that from a couple of teachers but in my experience and the experience of my colleagues it's not come up a single time.One of the things that we've traversed and that is still relevant is the fact that they haven't established that there are any problems with the current Government's model. There hasn't been a single person get up in a single debate from the opposite side of the House to say that there have been any decisions made by this council that could have been improved if there was a different governance model—not a single one. There haven't been any contributions that have made that claim. The Government's cry of "We need teachers on the council."—and that's been made many times and it's being made again today. We have pointed out so many times that the current council has six of the nine members on it who are current teachers and the others are incredibly well-respected individuals who are leaders in their field. This is a council of highly respected highly knowledgeable incredible individuals who are making great decisions. This brings us to the point of independence because one of the points that this Government has made in their contributions throughout—and it's still relevant at third reading—is the fact that by having elected members to the council the body will be more independent. Independence is questionable with only 13.7 percent of teachers actually voting. I do remember at second reading we pointed across the floor and we asked Mr Jamie Strange if he voted in the council elections and I do believe that he said that he couldn't remember or that he didn't think he did.Jamie Strange: Pretty sure—pretty sure.ERICA STANFORD: He's not sure—he's not sure. But look only 13.7 percent of teachers actually voted so the ability of the parties with vested interests to put up candidates to get successfully elected is very high and that is a concern for the independence of this body especially when the majority of the body is elected. None of the amendments that we put up were accepted. I had a really good one about making sure that we know the affiliation and the backers of candidates. None of those were accepted to counter this point so we have a question around independence. Given all this talk about the independence of the council by the Government one would hope that the Minister doesn't interfere with this council any further say by allowing a Minister to issue a direction relating to the teaching council. Surely he wouldn't do that given the cries about the importance of the independence of this council. Or perhaps by—I don't know—requiring the council to consult with the Minister prior to making changes to teacher qualification requirements or registration criteria. Surely he wouldn't do that because if he did consider such changes surely this would seriously undermine the independent nature of the council which we have been so vigorously debating in this House and talking about how important it is. Surely he wouldn't do that. Oh but wait he is doing it.Denise Lee: Here it is. [Holds up Order Paper marked with two yellow tabs]ERICA STANFORD: That's right—two yellow markers. He is doing it later on today—watch this space.I think it's important to traverse some of the other issues with this bill as well because one of them as we've mentioned is the cost and working out the value for money. Now Chlöe Swarbrick did actually say tonight "Oh but it's not Government money. It's not taxpayers' money. It's teachers' money." I think the point is that it's someone else's money and the Government has a real disregard when it comes to other people's money: "Oh don't worry that it's $700000. It's not taxpayers' money; it's the teachers' money. Don't worry—it's not our money."Chlöe Swarbrick: Teachers are asking for it.ERICA STANFORD: Teachers have never mentioned that they wanted this yet they're paying for it. It's important to go over the history of where we're at today because we had an old elected model and we're back. Here we are again: out with the old in with the older. The reason that we got rid of the old model was because of—well a multitude of reasons but one was the serious financial difficulties. It needed to be bailed out and in 2010 the council was described by the Education Workforce Advisory Group as lacking the capability and the capacity to carry out its functions. It was not best placed to carry out its functions. It had no ability to self-regulate or to self-review and it was not the best body to serve teachers. It's been said before and I'll say it again: we didn't make those changes on a whim. We did them on good advice. We did them on the advice of a review because there were serious problems with the existing body. A review told us that we needed a body with capability with knowledge and with people who were well respected in their field and that's what we ended up with. So here we have this highly competent body with 66.6 percent of the people on the council being teachers doing a great job that nobody questions or has a problem with. But it has to be changed because—well why actually we don't know because we actually haven't had a good argument from the Government as to why these changes are needed. It hasn't been adequately answered. It hasn't been established.I'd like to take my final minute just by acknowledging the current members of the council—highly respected individuals highly capable individuals—one of which is Claire Amos. She is the principal of Albany Senior High School in my electorate—just one of the many teachers that are represented on the council despite what the Government has said. I'm not going to go through them one by one but they're all highly respected individuals. One of them is Clare Wells. She is the chief executive of the New Zealand kindergartens association and despite what Jo Luxton said at first reading—that there wasn't any early childhood education representation on the board—she is a fantastic representative of the early childhood sector.All of the people on this current body are highly respected incredibly knowledgeable individuals who were put on there because of their skills and because of the fact that we had a body that wasn't performing and here we are potentially going back. Out with the old in with the older; back to a seven out of 13 board—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! Sorry the member's time has expired."