5. ANNE TOLLEY (National—East Coast) Link to this
to the Minister of Education
When will the Schools Plus policy be finalised and when will the finalised policy begin to be implemented?
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Education) Link to this
Schools Plus is a major reform of secondary education that is designed to upskill students who are not currently succeeding in our schools—surely something that every member of this House would support. The first phase of the formal consultation process on Schools Plus ended last month. We received over 509 formal submissions in addition to the feedback received from meetings held around the country over the last 8 weeks. This information will be analysed as we finalise policy details. The Government has always said that any extra costs for schools associated with the development of Schools Plus will be funded by the Government.
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I specifically asked the Minister when the policy would be finalised, and when the finalised policy would be implemented. Neither of those two questions was addressed in any shape by the Minister.
Madam SPEAKERI thank the member. I listened very carefully, and although the answer was long, the member did actually address the question.
Why, after National’s Youth Guarantee announcement, did the Prime Minister play catch-up and hurriedly announce she would lock all Kiwi students into school until they are 18, yet 4 months later in the Budget in May there was no extra funding for schools to implement this policy?
Schools Plus in no way represents any policy that the National Party has come up with. We are not planning to lock students in schools. The National Party may be planning to lock them in boot camps; we want to lock them into education.
Dr Ashraf ChoudharyThere has been overwhelming support. Parents—like every member of this House, I hope—want their children to succeed in education. Currently 25 percent of young New Zealanders leave school without the equivalent of National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) level 1. Schools Plus will give those students a new learning environment that hopefully will capture their interest in education. Only National seems to be against this excellent policy. John Key said last week on bFM radio that he was not prepared to provide any extra resources to schools and would not support Schools Plus. I wonder whether he told that to Alasdair Thompson of the Employers and Manufacturers Association (Northern), who has come out so strongly in favour of the policy; to the Post Primary Teachers Association, which has come out so strongly in favour of Schools Plus; or to school principals and the wider community, who are all welcoming this chance to make students who are not currently succeeding in our school system into successful learners.
Why did the Prime Minister announce a policy that was so poorly thought through that it took another 2 months after the announcement to release a discussion document; and why, 5 months after the announcement, is the policy so poorly understood by schools that, according to the Minister, every complaint schools have made is disingenuous, a misunderstanding, or completely unfounded?
I have not heard of a single person or organisation that does not support Schools Plus except the National Party. Every parent—every New Zealander—wants children to succeed in education. This 25 percent of students who are currently leaving school without NCEA level 1 are the future of our country. We want them to have skills. We want them to be citizens that will contribute to New Zealand. The member should support Schools Plus, not try to drag down our education system.
Does the Minister think it is good policy-making to announce the skeleton of an education policy in January; put out a discussion document that was all questions and no answers in March; provide no extra funding to schools for the policy in the Budget in May; and then in June, when schools start to criticise the lack of funding for Schools Plus, sneer at them publicly through the media and say that it does not really matter what they think, because they have to implement the policy anyway?
Why does the member never listen? In my primary answer I said that any costs associated with Schools Plus would be funded by the Government. The Prime Minister said that when we launched the programme earlier this year. This programme is a fundamental revolution in secondary education. It has to be implemented carefully, collaboratively, and with consultation; it cannot be rushed. Sure, we can lock kids up in a boot camp, but it will not change their attitude to education. We are talking about resourcing a programme that will change people’s lives.
What support will the Government be giving to businesses who have been aghast to hear that, according to the Schools Plus discussion document, for every one of their workers under the age of 18 they will have to provide “ongoing education, skills development, or structured learning through on-the-job learning or through flexible work hours that allow the employee to attend offsite learning opportunities.”?
Where does the member come up with these lines? We are in a consultation process—actually, an initial consultation process—where businesses, trade unions, schools, industry training organisations, and tertiary institutions will contribute to a discussion. I said that the member never listens. I quoted Alasdair Thompson of the Employers and Manufacturers Association (Northern), who was full of praise for Schools Plus. He is just one person among many in the business community who see this as a chance to lift the skills of young New Zealanders. The member should be applauding this programme, not tearing it down.
What does it say about the Minister, who dubbed himself “the great communicator”, when, in response to criticism of his Government’s flagship policy of locking kids into school until they are 18, all he does is fire pot shots at school principals through the media, skip post-Budget meetings with them, and instead offer such sage and inspiring advice as “It’s time to stop moaning and start teaching.”?
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I raise with you the content of that question. How can a question be a parliamentary question if it begins “What does it say about Somebody?”, and then is followed by a ramble? Where in any Westminster democracy would one hear someone asking a question that way?
The member is entitled to ask such a question, which, in effect, asked for an opinion. Presumably the answer will reflect that.
I would hope that every teacher and principal in New Zealand is absolutely focused on teaching, because that is the core business of schools. Our Schools Plus programme is about lifting the opportunities for the 25 percent of young New Zealanders who are currently not succeeding in education. It is a fantastic concept. It has to be worked through carefully. It is about real change. It is not about slogans about locking kids up in boot camps; it is about providing a realistic solution to a very real problem.
The Minister asked me where I had got my quote about businesses, which I read out. I seek leave to table the Schools Plus discussion document that that was—
I seek leave to table a document showing that New Zealand spends 4.7 percent of its GDP, the third-highest amount in the world, on schools.
Taito Phillip Field Link to this
Given the policy and the wonderful sentiments expressed about how the extra years will make a difference to children’s achievement in schools, can the Minister identify how those few extra years in school will make a difference to children who have failed in the previous 6 years of their school lives; and how will this programme identify the educational failure of Māori and Pacific Island children and assist in addressing it?
These children may well not be in school. The school will be responsible for their individualised learning plan, and it will be responsible for their attendance and for monitoring their progress. But these children might well be out of school 90 to 95 percent of the time in a Youth Apprenticeship programme or an expanded Gateway programme. Some of them might even be in tertiary education because they are ready for it a bit earlier. It is about providing alternative pathways, new pathways, for students who are not currently succeeding in the existing pathways available in schools.