3. Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Labour—Wellington Central) Link to this
to the Minister of Education
What reports has he received on the levels of literacy amongst New Zealand children?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Education) Link to this
I will try to not have an “unsmart” answer, as we learnt from the Leader of the Opposition before. I am advised that, in international studies of performance in reading literacy, our students were in the second-highest performing group of countries in the world. In reading we have the highest percentage of readers in the top category of any country. Last year the Government spent almost $46 million on literacy and numeracy initiatives. Next month I will announce results from the Literacy Professional Development Project, which show improvements across all students, with the biggest jump amongst students who were previously the lowest achievers. This is an endorsement of the hard work of teachers at all levels in our education system.
Is the Minister aware of any other comments made recently about the levels of literacy in New Zealand?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY Link to this
Last night I saw an outlandish claim from the National Party school spokesperson that said that 150,000 children in New Zealand cannot read. This is a typical piece of misleading information from the National Party. New Zealand children achieve above average in international reading studies, and our best readers, as I have said, are in the top category of any country. Currently 11,058 students are involved in outstanding reading-recovery programmes. We have an outstanding, world-class system. The National Party needs to stop sticking the knife into the backs of hard-working teachers in this country and to stop undermining our system as it seeks to privatise it.
Judy TurnerConsidering that our current vision screening detects only about 10 percent of vision difficulties, does the Minister think that all children presenting with low literacy levels should be entitled to at least a free optometrist test; if not, why not?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY Link to this
I agree with the general principle and I would like to think that we would be working towards exactly that.
Gerry BrownleeI raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I just wonder whether we might be reminded again as a House that questions should start with a question word, rather than with the sort of preface that we have started to see in a number of questions over the last 2 days.
Madam SPEAKERWell, it worked very well for the National Party last time. It does not work so well for Labour members—they struggle. United Future has got absolutely no idea, New Zealand First will have nothing to say, and the Greens, of course, will continue giving their particular view of the world that no one can understand.
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Mr Brownlee has taken to making supposed points of order and then spending the rest of the time slagging off other parties and other leaders. The fact, of course, is that he is the least qualified person in National’s whole caucus to be taking those points of order. It is obvious. But he should be stopped and asked to desist from that sort of behaviour.
I think the point was taken. I would say that Mr Brownlee is not the only member in this House who occasionally strays from the point of the point of order. We shall leave it there and move on.
Hon Peter DunneI raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I do not want to delay proceedings unduly, but I want to draw your attention to Speaker’s ruling 20/1, from 1891, I seem to recall, which indicates that the constant raising of trifling points of order is of itself disorderly. I want to ask you what steps you are going to take to enforce that Speaker’s ruling, because I think it would contribute to the good order of this House if it was enforced.
I thank the member for drawing my attention to that Speaker’s ruling, which I am aware of. I think the House has to be on notice that the time should be devoted to question time, not speeches through points of order. So I shall try to exercise discretion, but members are on notice that perhaps they could make their points of order more like points of order than points of debate.
Firstly, my point of order was a point of order. It raised, very much, a question about questions starting with a question. As for Mr Peters’ allegations, I simply say that I have spent many an hour in this House studying at the feet of the master, and, although I could never be as good at irrelevant points of order as the right honourable irrelevant gentleman himself, it is he who has set the pace in this House.
The member, of course, raised a valid point of order, and that was acknowledged. It was the speech that followed that was the cause of subsequent comments. As I have already said, if members are making a point of order, they must make the point of order and not give a speech to the House. That is a debating matter.