Hipkins ChrisClauses 1 to 4Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): Thank you Madam Chair. I'm looking forward to the debate on this bill. I want to congratulate the member Jan Tinetti for bringing the bill to the House and say that I'm very excited about the outbreak of bipartisanship that I now expect on this particular legislation because I am sure the National Party will be revisiting their minority view on this bill as a result of the comments they made on a bill that we were debating earlier on today. I thought I might focus on that in particular because the National Party in their minority view on this bill—and I found this quite fascinating to read. Perhaps by way of context earlier this morning I heard four five six speeches that I sat through in here debating the difference between the words may" and "must"—"may" or "must". It required a good half hour of debate in the House to debate just that thing on the part of the National Party. They thought this was very very important and very significant so they took a whole half hour to debate the difference between the words "may" and "must". Then they talked about how vitally important it was that these small amendments were considered in great detail—so much so that we spent an hour voting on those amendments.So now when we come to this particular bill it's interesting to see in their minority view this particular comment: "This bill proposes several insignificant changes to the NELP."—the National Education and Learning Priorities (NELP)—"Replacing 'good' with 'positive' and adding 'to become lifelong learners' will have no effect". That's interesting because that's their minority view this afternoon and yet this morning they were arguing exactly the opposite. They were arguing that when it comes to consultation the difference between "may" and "must" was something that the House should spend an extensive amount of time talking about.Now why is that important? It's because when you look at the specific clauses of the bill the most significant part of the bill now as reported back from the Education and Workforce Committee is that it makes very explicit in the law who the Minister must make reasonable efforts to consult when setting the statement of National Education and Learning Priorities.Now I think this is a good thing. It's about saying that actually there's no question of "may"; this is a question of "must". Now the National Party this morning thought this was an incredibly important distinction to make. In fact Tim Macindoe—I'm looking forward to his contribution because he spent at least two or three calls talking about the importance between "may" and "must" this morning and now he's going to vote against a bill that actually makes the change that he was arguing for this morning. So I'm looking forward to hearing Tim Macindoe explain in great detail the road to Damascus conversion he had over lunchtime where he now no longer thinks that there is a particularly important distinction between "may consult" and "must consult" because this morning "may consult" and "must consult" were the most important issues that the New Zealand Parliament should debate for quite an extended period of time.But let's actually look at who the Minister—and I'm the Minister concerned—would now be required to consult in setting the statement of National Education and Learning Priorities. First on the list—very important—are children and young people. I actually think this is a very sensible decision. When I am as Minister of Education setting out what is important in education National Education and Learning Priorities I think it's important that children and young people who are going to be affected by those decisions should be consulted and should have a voice. That's something the Children's Commissioner has argued for consistently and I think that's highly justified.Second on the list—in new section 1A(4A)(b) inserted by clause 4—are "bodies representing the interests of teachers;". Now I think that that's true. Now who might those bodies be? We call them teachers teacher unions the Education Council—or the Teaching Council as it's now known—but the National Party like to call them our union mates when they are not being nice to the unions but when they are being nice to the unions they say completely the opposite to that. It seems to alternate on a minute-by-minute basis at the moment with regard to the National Party. They can't quite decide whether they want to be friends of the unions and opposing the Government or whether they think that they are our union mates. So that's interesting. But I think teachers should have a clear say in the statement of National Education and Learning Priorities and I think the Minister—and me as the Minister—should be required to consult with them.Bodies representing the interests of principals should be consulted. They are third on the list and I absolutely agree that principals should be consulted. I think that our principals are where you get a huge body of expertise not just about teaching and learning but about how the education system is actually operating and principals are right at the forefront of the relationship between schools and families and the wider community. This is what principals deal with all day every day—that huge network of relationships that goes into the education system. So yes they have got a really vital and important view and that should be heard when the Government is setting National Education and Learning Priorities.Bodies representing the interests of governing bodies of schools—so these are boards of trustees boards of proprietors and so on—I think that they should absolutely be consulted bearing in mind that they are largely made up of parents. Parents are a huge stakeholder in our schools' communities and therefore they should be consulted when we are setting our priorities.Bodies representing the interests of early childhood services—this is important because the National Education and Learning Priorities statement doesn't just apply to schooling; it applies to early childhood education as well and so consultation with early childhood education services is important.Bodies representing the interests of parents should be consulted. Again that will often be covered by some of the earlier clauses because boards of trustees often are one of the main bodies representing the interests of parents in the education system but there are others. There's the parent teacher associations and so on and they should be consulted.National bodies representing the interests of the disability community—absolutely agree. One of the biggest issues that I'm dealing with as Minister of Education at the moment and I'm working on it with my good friend and colleague the Associate Minister Tracey Martin is the issue around learning support and there are huge and many and varied issues around learning support. I would say it is the biggest issue that gets raised with me by school principals whenever I visit a school and so I think that consulting with the disability community when we are setting national priorities is more than justified.New section 1A(4A)(h) is "national bodies representing the interests of support staff in schools and early childhood education services;". I want to say a word about school support staff. They are among the most poorly paid people in the education system and they deserve significantly better than they are getting now. I can give them some assurance that it is one of our Government's highest priorities to deal with the issues that they are facing. So I think that they should be consulted.Then national bodies representing the interests of Māori education organisations Pacific education organisations—they should absolutely be consulted. We know that we have challenges around persistently lower outcomes for Māori and Pasifika learners than for others and so I think it's important that when we are setting our national priorities that voice is heard in that process.Finally the proprietors of State and State-integrated schools and the bodies with a particular role with respect to the character of designated character schools—now of course they should be consulted as well.So this bill puts something into law that the previous Government refused to put into law which is some requirements around consultation. This document that we're talking about the statement of National Education and Learning Priorities is not an insignificant document. It is the document that all school boards of trustees are going to have to give regard to when they set their school's strategic plan. Now this morning the National Party argued that school boards of trustees should be "required" to consult around their individual plans but now they are arguing in their opposition to this bill—and it's here in black and white in their minority view—that there shouldn't be robust consultation requirements around setting the national plan the plan that affects the entire country. Every young person in the country will be affected by it but it should just be a "may"—the Minister can do whatever they like.And I'd like them to explain to the committee why there's that enormous discrepancy because it seems to me they had a point this morning around the difference between "may" and "must". Now I don't think it was necessary in the context of that particular debate to make that change because I actually have faith that the boards of trustees will consult their communities because they're directly accountable and answerable to them. But as Minister of Education—Ministers of Education are accountable on quite a wide basis for quite a wide range of things. And I think therefore being quite specific about the fact that when they're setting the NELP the National Education and Learning Priorities they have to consult with those who are going to be affected by it and those who are going to have to implement the commitments in that statement—I think that that's a very significant change to the law and I think it's a very welcome one. And as the Minister who will be tasked with developing the first NELP I can say that it's one that I wholeheartedly endorse and look forward to seeing passed into law."