Smith Lockwood: Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Smith Lockwood: Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:620;Page:16196] 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
: 
 In speaking to the first reading of this Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill I say very clearly that National is totally opposed to it. This is disgraceful manipulative and vindictive legislation which is being introduced today to stop Unitec formerly the Carrington Polytechnic from becoming a university. It is so vindictive that Part 2 inserts a retrospective measure—as the Minister of Education in a very minor way acknowledged—to try to prevent Unitec from having any chance of success in the courts in any effort to pursue its legitimate aspirations. 
What I find unusual about that retrospective measure is that the Parliamentary Library stated of that part of the bill: “This appears to be designed to prevent any successful Court action by Unitec based on the present law forcing the Minister to complete the entire Section 162 process to a favourable conclusion for Unitec before the Bill is passed.” That is the Parliamentary Library of New Zealand stating that—not some politically biased party—in its analysis of this legislation. The library is actually saying that the legislation is vindictive but it does not use that word. It just points out that the legislation is designed to stop Unitec from being able to use the court system to pursue its legitimate interests. 
I have to say that I have not often seen such mean legislation introduced into this Parliament although I will admit that Labour has done it before—back in 2000 I think. Again the Parliamentary Library was pretty blunt about it. The Labour Government introduced an education bill limiting the number of universities to try to stop Unitec from becoming a university. Way back then the Parliamentary Library stated: “Unitec’s application got as far as the formation of a Qualifications Authority - appointed international assessment panel in May 2000.” So a panel had been appointed to assess the application. But of course what happened? Labour introduced that bill to stop it from going any further and the institution is still waiting to be assessed. 
It is obnoxious for this Parliament to be used by this Labour Government in this demeaning way to pursue its manipulative mean and nasty aspirations. This Parliament should be above that mean and nasty stuff. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Is the member angry again? 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH 
: The Minister asks whether I am angry again. Let us appeal to the reason of the Minister. What is the mischief what is the problem with Unitec— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: That’s a bit of a long bow. 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH 
: The Minister said it himself; I asked whether we could appeal to the reason of the Minister and he said that that was drawing a long bow. What is the mischief? If we look at the balance of graduates emerging from New Zealand’s universities we see that we produce more accountants—or used to a couple of years ago—than Australia or any other country in the world. We produce more law graduates than any other country in the world apart from the United States of America. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: You mean proportionately. 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH 
: Yes proportionately. I accept the Minister’s correction. Per head of population New Zealand produces more accountants and lawyers than any other country in the world. But what New Zealand needs desperately is for our universities to produce more graduates in applied science. The Minister has come to realise I thought that biotechnology and the wider areas of technology are huge areas for New Zealand’s future. Applied science is where New Zealand’s future lies and here we have a Government constraining our universities to the old-style universities most of which produce lots of law accountancy and arts graduates. We have very few universities producing applied science graduates. So I appeal to the reason of the Government: we actually need a university like Unitec that is focused on the applied sciences that is focused on applied study at a university level. 
I suppose one could argue that this bill gives the Government’s Tertiary Education Commission something to do. Maybe that is what the Government is after here. The Minister has to seek the commission’s advice on whether this fits in with “the interests of the tertiary education system and the nation as a whole”. Maybe this is something the Tertiary Education Commission could do with its $40 million bureaucracy. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: $44 million. 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH 
: Its $44 million bureaucracy one of my colleagues reminds me. This would give the commission a job to do—something I guess to justify its $44 million. 
But it is serious. I have been around education a while. I was in universities for 13 years personally both as a student and as a university teacher. I have been in universities a bit longer than most members of this Chamber. I was Minister of Education for many years and during the time that National was in power and I was Minister our tertiary sector in this country flourished. We went from the bottom of the OECD in terms of participation to the top. I have some experience in this field. I want to put this to the Labour Government: if Governments think that through legislative decree they can create great learning institutions they are wrong. Great universities and our great learning institutions evolve over time and our law should allow that process to happen. We should not seek to prevent it from happening. 
We can take for example the former university of Steve Maharey the Associate Minister responsible for this bill—Massey University. It also happens to be my former university. Massey University started out as a college Massey College. It was initially involved in teaching about farming and has evolved to become one of the great universities of applied science in the world. It has grown hugely if one takes its entire breadth and coverage. It is not strong across all areas at the moment but the area of applied science certainly is. It is one of the great applied science universities of the world. As a graduate—and I was a reasonable graduate—of Massey University I had entrée into any of the great universities of the world. As a Commonwealth scholar coming out of Massey University I had entrée into any of the great universities of the world—and that place started as just a farming college. 
I will refer members to another important institution in Australasia. The Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology is a university. It started out as the Working Men’s College in 1887 and it was amalgamated with the Philip Institute of Technology in 1992. What started as two very modest institutes of technology—one was a working men’s college—has evolved to the point that the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology is now a major university in Australasia. Beyond that the institute has major teaching linkages to South-east Asia. It has a major international operation covering the whole of Australasia and into South-east Asia. If Australia had had New Zealand’s legislation that might not have happened. That institution has evolved over time and grown to be a hugely valuable tertiary institution for Australia and for our part of the world. 
The tragedy of this mean manipulative short-sighted legislation from the Labour Government is that it kills that evolution. It provides that Government dictate shall determine what organisations will be universities and it protects some universities that probably should die because they are not good enough. It is possible that over time universities decline in status. Everyone knows which faculties in which universities are worth studying in. Not all are and people know that but Governments should not try to dictate this matter by law. Unitec has evolved to the stage where it now offers very fine courses in the applied sciences and technology. It ought to be able to evolve those further as a university just like the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology and the Auckland University of Technology have done. New Zealand needs more than just graduates in law accountancy and the arts. It is a tragedy for New Zealand’s future if this legislation goes any further.