Delahunty CatherineCATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green): I have no objection to this proposal from the Government for a change for the House to rise early. However I cannot support the bill. I saw a flicker of excitement ripple through the green leather chairs in the moment a gasp of excitement rippled through the consciousness of the National Party members that perhaps they were not going to have to listen to me attack the privatisation of education—that I was in the spirit of enjoyment and pleasure going to support their bill but no.Consistency is very important in education and after 8½ years on the Education and Science Committee this speech will be a continuation of the one I made earlier because what is happening in the tertiary sector is reminiscent of early childhood and is also reminiscent of what is being proposed for the compulsory sector and we do not like it. Although there are some really good solid measures in this bill that we agree with in terms of creating some clarity around some of the ongoing issues there is a fundamental problem and it has been identified not only by my colleague Gareth Hughes in his first speech on this bill but also by the Tertiary Education Union. Fundamentally if we start talking about flexibility in funding meaning that the private institutions will be funded similarly at the same rate and in the same way as the public we are going to change the game and the game is already very fragile.When I say fragile" I would just like to quote from the stress dossier which you may have heard of that the Tertiary Education Union in calling for a review outlined because it received 500 anonymous comments about stress in relation to this bill. This is not just stress—the human condition—which I am sure we know about; this is stress related to being in a tertiary education occupation. Where staff have been put under greater pressure the union wanted to shine a light on what it is like to work in the tertiary education sector under the current regime because it was very worried about this bill. It was worried that changes are being enshrined in law without it having a proper opportunity to have a thorough sector-wide review.I just want to quote one aspect of the funding issue that was in the dossier: "Ever since funding was linked to retention and success there has been pressure from management to pass more students while at the same time wanting more full-time students." These are very concerning comments. Another quote: "We have been required to remove all internal compulsory items from our course. Now all assessment items are no longer compulsory. This was done with the rationale that more passes means more funding". So flexibility in the tertiary sector can have "enormous" effects particularly in the regions and particularly when the education sector has become at the tertiary level highly competitive. As Sandra Grey said we don't want to see National "enshrine into law its guiding principle of putting profit before students without first reviewing the impact … on the quality of tertiary education." I think that quote is very fair as is the other quote I will read: "The review needs to hear directly from staff about what it's like to work in the sector" rather than staff having to "set aside their commitment to quality education and change marks to fit National's funding priorities."What the dossier does is reveal unintended consequences that the tertiary funding model has created. It is not saying that this is a machiavellian plot to create a distortion in education. We do not even need Machiavelli around here; things just happen around here because of people's possibly genuine belief that the market will fix everything in the face of complete evidence to the contrary. But this bill will go to the Education and Science Committee and we will look through it thoroughly. I hope that we will listen to the voices of the dossier not the voices of people who are convinced that funding needs to be modernised to be more flexible at the expense of the quality of our education system. Because read my lips—market and quality ain't the same thing. Kia ora."