Heatley Phil: Education (Disestablishment of Early Childhood Development Board) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Heatley Phil: Education (Disestablishment of Early Childhood Development Board) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12130] 
PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) 
: 
 May I read to members the minority view stated in the commentary on the Education (Disestablishment of Early Childhood Development Board) Amendment Bill because I think it best encapsulates what the ACT party and the National Party are saying regarding it. It states: “The New Zealand National Party and ACT New Zealand oppose this bill. It represents an aggregation and centralisation of function into the education bureaucracy. Moreover the actual disestablishment occurred before the enactment of the legislation. It is a breach of constitutional principle for the Executive to implement a legislative policy without specific legislative authority.” I did not know before Deborah Coddington spoke that it has actually been a full 12 months from the time that that occurred in practice to the present when we are passing the bill that establishes the mechanism for that to occur. I would find a few weeks disturbing and I would find a few months of great concern but 12 months I fully agree is a complete breach of constitutional principle and is quite obscene. 
I have three issues that I would like to raise in the debate on the second reading that outline in more detail the general reasons why we oppose the bill. The first issue is that we have seen a drive by the Labour Government to see its philosophical desire to have centralisation and central control. We saw it in the merger of the Special Education Service into the Ministry of Education a few years ago. There was no real reason for that but the two were merged. The Special Education Service no longer stands alone. It is part of the ever-burgeoning Ministry of Education. Then there was the announcement members will recall of the merger of the Ministry of Youth Affairs and the Ministry of Social Development creating another super-bureaucracy. Again there was the issue of an agency the Ministry of Youth Affairs being off to the side author of its own destiny then becoming part of another superministry looked over by another Minister building his kingdom. Lastly in that series of course we see the disestablishment of the Early Childhood Development Board which also is being brought into the Ministry of Education. 
 The argument of this philosophical drive is that it will bring a decrease in bureaucracy but I have never seen a decrease in bureaucracy in the term of a Labour Government since I have been on this earth and that has been for some time. We always see an increase in bureaucracy. The Government also argues that centralisation will lower costs yet we hear from the Minister of Education himself that he will raise the amount of money he pours into the sector and the bureaucracy. He also says this measure will remove unnecessary personnel. That is the usual argument for centralisation yet we have seen a growing Ministry of Education. In fact percentage-wise the funding going into the Ministry of Education far exceeds the funding going into schools universities and early childhood education centres. So that is what we are seeing—a trend in the last few years to centralise and control under the banner of a decrease in bureaucracy lowered costs and removing unnecessary personnel. In practical terms we have seen an increase in bureaucracy increased costs and more employment of unnecessary personnel. 
There are some big issues facing early childhood education in particular the independent providers being hugely disadvantaged by this Government’s bias towards State-owned providers. We thought this merger would be used as an excuse to cut funding or divert attention from some of the big issues facing the sector. But in fact all we see is more funding being poured into the sector but not into the front line into educating kids; as I said before we see more funding going into bureaucracy and unnecessary personnel. We have been watching this merger. It has gone on for some time now and we can report back that that is certainly all that we have seen come out of it. 
The second overriding issue apart from that philosophical drive to centralise and control is a concern that the Minister through the disestablishment is actually now listening to only one stream of advice: his own little people. When he has a query or a concern whom does he run to? He runs to his little elves. He is not prepared to go to anyone else in the sector and listen to him or her. He does not get advice that is considered and he does not get advice without a bias. He talks to his own people. That is why a single bloated bureaucracy that is the inspection and enforcement agency the funding administrator the provider of advice and support the researcher and the policy adviser can only lead to confusion conflict and poor decisions. There is no accountability there is no contrary view and no one calling in the wilderness is being listened to by this Minister who wants to centralise and control. We point that out as one of our major concerns. 
The third concern is to do with resources. The country this sector in particular is quite confused about the messages sent out from this disestablishment and merger. We hear from the Minister that the integration would provide more cohesive service delivery in the early childhood education sector. In fact he said there would be more resources. In his press release of 12 March 2003 he stated that early childhood education is to be “boosted” by the merger. What did he mean by that? Did he mean more money for kindies and early childhood education centres? They do not have any more money. Did he mean more resources? They do not have those either. Did he mean more choice? He certainly did not mean that—and I mentioned that before—because of his love for public providers and his apparent hatred and distaste for private education providers. 
He said there would be more money and more jobs but according to a press release on the New Zealand education review the Education and Science Committee was told that job cuts would result from the Early Childhood Development - ministry merger. Early Childhood Development’s chair Michael Morris and its chief executive Caryl-Louise Robinson told the select committee that redundancies would result from the integration of the agency into the ministry. So has it been job cuts and unnecessary personnel laid off or more jobs for the boys and girls—as John Tamihere refers to them—in this ministry? We do not know. All we know is that in the last 12 months and even before that we have had an ever-burgeoning Ministry of Education with more resources going into the ministry and bureaucracy and fewer resources going into the front line into the teaching of our children. 
That is of serious concern to us. During the Committee stage members will hear detailed clause-by-clause arguments on these issues but those are the three concerns to us in the National Party and that is why we do not support the bill.