PARLIAMENTARY REPORT
NEW ZEALAND THIRD READING: NEW ZEALAND
Education Amendment Bill (No 2) The Education Amendment Bill (No 2), which was read a third time on 10 February 2015, provides for the creation of the new Education Council of Aotearoa New Zealand, a reduction in the size of university councils, and the establishment of a regulatory framework for teachers and an independent contract disputes resolution scheme for international students. The Minister of Education, Hon. Hekia Parata
MP (National) told the House that “the Bill reflects the recommendations of the 2012 review of the New Zealand Teachers Council and the 2013 report of the ministerial advisory group […and] creates a regulatory environment that promotes accountability and high standards.” The Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment, Hon. Steven Joyce MP (National) emphasised the importance of international education and said: “It contributes, the latest figures say, $2.85 billion a year to our economy and over 30,000 additional jobs for New Zealanders […] The changes proposed are the latest in a series of reforms made by this government to improve the performance and quality of tertiary education.”
Opposition parties opposed the legislation at every
stage. Mr Chris Hipkins MP (Labour) told the House that “the Education Council of Aotearoa New Zealand is being set up to fail from the beginning […] because it does not have the support of the profession. The overwhelming feedback from the hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people who came along […] to have their say on this Bill was that they were opposed to it.” Ms Catherine Delahunty MP (Green), said: “In six years of being on the Education and Science Committee, I have never seen so much unity and solidarity from all parts of the tertiary education sector [as there was] against this Bill.” Ms Tracey Martin, MP (New Zealand First) added that “not a single university came and supported this legislation—not a single one.” However, Mr Paul Foster-Bell MP (National), commented that the legislation “is about the students more than it is about teachers” while fellow National Member Mr Todd Barclay, MP added that the Bill “improves the discipline and reporting requirements that protect children.”
The Bill passed its third reading by 61 votes to 59. Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4)
Thirty-four Bills divided from the Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4) by the Committee of the whole House passed their third readings unanimously on 24 March 2015. The Bills make minor or technical amendments to 34 separate Acts.
In New Zealand statutes amendment Bills are one of the few types of omnibus bills that may be introduced into the House. Introducing the second reading on 24 February 2015, the Associate Minister of Justice, Hon. Simon Bridges MP (National) said: “what a Statutes Amendment Bill enables Parliament to do is to make technical, short, and non-controversial amendments to a number of Acts. It enables amendments that would not usually receive sufficient priority to be progressed individually. This is achieved with the support of all parties in Parliament.” Hon. Ruth Dyson MP (Labour) said: “the most important thing that Members need to know is that one single Member of Parliament can object to a provision in a Statutes Amendment Bill, and then it […] would be withdrawn […] So it is not a simple majority as it is with other statutes that are before the House; it is one that everyone agrees to.”
The select committee that considered the parent Bill had recommended most provisions be passed. It recommended against a proposed amendment that sought to include a definition of “legal professional privilege” in the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act.
Hon. David Parker MP (Labour) said: “the introduction of a narrower definition than the wider definition of ‘legal professional privilege’ might have had the opposite effect to that which was intended.” At the third reading Ms Dyson, who chairs the select committee, explained that amendments within statutes amendment Bills “generally clarify policy that is unclear because of the drafting, so that the original policy intent is reflected in the amended drafting. They are not meant to involve any policy changes at all. […] The Government Administration Committee […] considered that some of the provisions, as they were outlined, were not appropriate for inclusion in a statutes amendment Bill […] So we struck out some provisions and we recommended changes in others.”
124 | The Parliamentarian | 2015: Issue Two
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76