Brown Simeon; Rurawhe AdrianSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Mr Speaker for the opportunity to take a call on the Education and Training Bill at the second reading. I just want to remind the House that this was meant to be a piece of legislation which was going to give rise to the Government's enormous contribution to the education sector through the Tomorrow's Schools review where they were going to reimagine the education system and where they were going to make massive changes to how the system worked. But all we've got is really just a whole lot of legislation put together. It's not as the previous speaker said 578 pages; it's actually 668 pages put into a big ream of paper basically with a few changes included but nothing of the substantial visionary Tomorrow's Schools changes which the Government and Mr Hipkins were going around New Zealand talking about. That's a good thing in some respects because one of the key changes that the Tomorrow's Schools review did propose was to essentially wipe out boards of trustees and to reimagine our education system with so-called hubs which would manage hundreds of schools and somehow deliver better outcomes. Of course we on this side of the House opposed that proposal because we know that when communities are at the heart of education when parents and families and children and educators are working together in a local school then we will get better outcomes for our young people and for the future of our country. So I'm very pleased to see that that centralisation change has been wiped out. But this piece of legislation does chip away and does continue to put the theme of centralisation into our education system. It's about how much control the Minister of Education could grab. He realised he couldn't grab it all he tried but he got as much as he could through this. Of course the bill went to the select committee and there were hundreds of submitters. I just want to acknowledge everybody who made a submission on that bill. I think 90 submitters came and presented orally to this select committee. I want to particularly acknowledge them for taking their time to do that.I just want to make this important point around the process because this bill has been kept to the traditional six-month time frame for bills going through Parliament. Whilst normally in normal circumstances that would be OK in these circumstances that meant that a significant portion of that time was whilst the country was in lockdown and dealing with COVID-19. Of course COVID-19 has changed every single aspect of our society. In particular it's had a huge impact on our education system and on our education sector. I just want to acknowledge all the schools in my electorate of Pakuranga for the work they have done to continue to ensure that the education that young people in my electorate get continues to be to the top standard that it always has been. I just want to say thank you for all the hard work that they've put in.Now I want to get to some of the key points in what we oppose in this bill. Firstly one of the key power grabs that this bill does is to take responsibility off schools for the setting of school zones. This is an important point for schools up and down the country and particularly important in my electorate of Pakuranga because when a school sets a zone it can be a controversial aspect but it's also very important part of what a school board does. A school board in setting a zone has the responsibility of consulting with the community. And who best knows who is in that community? Who best knows that community? Is it the bureaucrats in Wellington who look at lines on a map and demographic data and come up with proposals? Or is it the people who actually live there who send their kids to those schools who help fundraise for the school who know the parent community? Is it them or is it the bureaucrats in Wellington? This bill says it's the bureaucrats in Wellington who know better than the parents in my electorate and I take great offence to that because I know the parents in my electorate of Pakuranga know their community far better than the bureaucrats in Wellington who look at lines on a map.I've had examples even during my time as a member of Parliament with zoning changes and the school will come and see you or parents will come and talk to you about it and they talk about what they know about this street and that street and who lives there and what that means—details which the ministry has no idea about. Inevitably once you have that engagement you get positive changes and you get a better outcome. But this says No the bureaucrats in Wellington will know better than the parents in Pakuranga." and I find that completely offensive.Another really important change it makes is around the purpose of our school boards of trustees. What it does is it removes school boards' specific accountability for raising student achievement by making it one of four equal objectives. So currently under the law a school board's specific accountability is to raise the student achievement in that school. That is their responsibility clearly defined. Now it makes it one of four equal objectives with a range of other aspects which are barely defined and which will mean that that primary responsibility of student achievement gets diluted as the school board of trustees has to focus on other things as well.When I think of our local schools I think of student achievement as being the primary objective in that school. Because when I think of what the outcomes that we're wanting from our education system are it's about our young people being able to achieve to get a good education and to come out with qualifications which will set them up for their future. This dilutes that responsibility and will inevitably lead to worse outcomes in our education system.Another really important point which goes back to how this piece of legislation should not have continued to be rushed through during COVID-19 is the fact that it removes the ability for NCEA qualifications to be granted offshore.Hon Tracey Martin: It went through select committee didn't it?SIMEON BROWN: It did go to a select committee and I hear a bit of chitter chatter about the rush—Hon Tracey Martin: A full select committee; it didn't get rushed at all.SIMEON BROWN: I hear a bit of chitter chatter about the rush—yes I acknowledged earlier. I acknowledged earlier that it went through a normal six-month period. But the world has changed the world has moved on COVID-19 has happened. But the Government is now saying we're going to bring a Supplementary Order Paper (SOP). So that SOP didn't go to the committee submitters didn't get the opportunity to look at it they didn't get the opportunity to scrutinise it. The Government spent 2½ years having working groups and reviews in education but when it comes to the crunch they're happy to whack an SOP in there so they can get their point across.So one of the areas is the fact that this bill removes the ability for NCEA qualifications to be granted offshore. That has a significant impact on the international students which—Hon Tracey Martin: That's why there's an SOP.SIMEON BROWN: Well then why did you not put it to the select committee?Hon Tracey Martin: Because COVID happened after it was at select committee.SIMEON BROWN: Oh there's more excuses from the Government. They're full of working groups and excuses; it's the two things they are good at—and non-delivery that makes three. And incompetence four. Well I guess the list does go on doesn't it? I could go on about the Government's failures but I won't. Let's get back to this piece of legislation.Another part of this bill is it continues the ideological reforms around the review of vocational education. Another significant reform this Government has done amalgamating our polytechs all under one umbrella thinking that you'll get better outcomes by having the one educational beast which—it's not going to be based in Wellington that one. I think they're going to base that one somewhere else I think it's in Hamilton this time.Hon Kelvin Davis: What's your excuse for the failure of all those organisations under your guys' watch?SIMEON BROWN: Well I can tell the Minister that's asking me the question that the Government's amalgamations will not lead to better outcomes in the vocational education system. We know it's going to cost—they've already announced hundreds of millions of dollars in this Budget to try and put it into bureaucrats rather than education. That's what they did in this Budget.Another really important point is the education changes in this bill around early childhood education and how they are putting in place active network management. Now what does active network management mean? More control for bureaucrats in Wellington rather than choice for communities and allowing choice for families when it comes to education. That's what this bill is about. It's about the creeping control of Wellington rather than empowering our local communities. The National Party will not support this bill.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): This is a split call. I call Marja Lubeck five minutes."