Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) : After that amazing valedictory speech from Richard Prebble, it is back to battle. I want to raise with the Government the damning report that is provided in the Education Sector Review, which paints a horrifying picture not only of the state of the Government’s education bureaucracies but of the mess that they have made impacting on ordinary New Zealand students. When the Government first came in it passed a big Tertiary Education Reform Bill, which set up the Tertiary Education Commission. It told this Parliament, and the people of New Zealand, that that would result in a flash new strategic approach to tertiary education. As my colleague Bill English said, that bureaucracy has consumed $100 million a year of public money—$100 million every year. We are talking about half a billion dollars of public money. Five years later, what does the Government’s own report state? It states: “The … education agencies do not have the capability to take a strategic approach to policy implementation.” That is what the Government’s own report states. We can remember so well Steve Maharey giving speech after speech about the new strategic approach to tertiary education. Five years later, and after spending half a billion dollars, the Government’s own report states that that has not happened.

Then there is the fiasco that occurred in respect of students’ school qualifications. That is the National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) debacle. We have the same report—it is from Treasury, from the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, and from the State Services Commission—stating that “the agencies do not have the essential capability … to support the magnitude of change” that is expected to be undertaken in the senior secondary sector. What does that mean? It means that the 540,000 secondary students in New Zealand get a botched qualification. After 5 years of having Trevor Mallard at the helm of our education system, we have botched the qualifications for thousands of New Zealand students.

Some of those students are my constituents. Some of them are bright top students from excellent secondary schools like Nayland College, Waimea College, and Nelson College for Girls. I have met some of those young people, who are angry and frustrated that for their 5 years of hard toil at secondary school they have ended up with a botched qualification. What does the Government say? Government members think that is funny. Trevor Mallard was in the Chamber earlier, making jokes about it. After 5 years of him being in the role of Minister of Education, we have a gigantic botch-up.

What does the report state about the NCEA? It states that there is an urgent need to stabilise the NCEA and that there is a view that greater ministerial involvement would assist that. What does that say? It says that the Minister has not been doing his job, and that young, bright New Zealanders have paid the price for that with a botched qualification. Then we hear what the report states about the Tertiary Education Commission. The commission is the bold new agency that the Labour Government set up, and the report is damning in terms of that commission. We know that 2 years after Trevor Mallard said that singalong courses would be stopped, they are still going. This very day, at the Eastern Institute of Technology, students continue to be enrolled in singalong courses.

SIMON POWER (National—Rangitikei) : I have sat on the Education and Science Committee for the last 12-15 months, and I have to say that a number of the issues that have been raised so skilfully and diligently by the Hon Bill English—particularly in the last 12-15 months—reflect the most interesting trend in the education sector. I can recall standing in this Chamber during the reading of the legislation to pass the Tertiary Education Commission into life. At that time the Hon Steve Maharey told the House that the Tertiary Education Commission would be a light-handed, strategic steering instrument. I do not know what that means. I spent 6 years at university and I do not have a clue what that means, but that is Steve Maharey’s language. The point is that there is nothing light-handed about the Tertiary Education Commission, and, more to the point, there is nothing strategic about it, either.

I ask the Minister in the chair, the Hon Paul Swain, to tell us the last time a new bureaucracy was set up in this country that was described by the Minister who created it as light-handed. The Tertiary Education Commission has an annual budget of approximately $42 million, it employs 324 people, and within the first 12 months of its life it had a massive restructuring to make its governance and management structure more relevant. The result of that restructuring was that the number of people working at the Tertiary Education Commission reduced by four.

The governance structure, which had an executive chairman—Dr Andy West—in place, an executive deputy chairperson, a commission, a general manager, and a deputy general manager, was a structure that we told the Minister would not work. Andy West left within 2 years of the commission being formed. The structure was completely rejigged and good old Russell Marshall had to return from London to fix the mess that Steve Maharey had created by creating this particular commission, which has gone nowhere.

In the meantime singalong courses continued. We discovered in this Chamber on Tuesday that they are still on the website of various institutions. People are still enrolling and still doing those courses, and the total cost at the end of this year will be over $9 million to the taxpayers of New Zealand. In the meantime pet homeopathy, twilight golf, and other courses have continued, yet this Government has the nerve to tell the people of New Zealand that it is not wasting their tax dollars; that matters of surpluses in the vicinity of $7.4 billion are being well spent.

Well, I can tell the Minister that they are not. The bureaucracy in the education sector in this country has been exposed. Steve Maharey was shifted out of that particular portfolio and “Mr Fix-it” was brought in. We saw last week how that went. If the Government is relying on the Hon Trevor Mallard to fix this mess, it will be waiting a long, long time. What Trevor Mallard discovered was that the Te Wānanga o Aotearoa was being fed hundreds of millions of dollars and was not performing. So when it recorded its troubles to the Minister, what did the ministry do? It wrote a cheque for $20 million and told the wānanga: “Here, have some more, and this will make it OK.” Trevor Mallard is delicately trying to say: “Well, actually, I wasn’t the Minister at the time.” Well, actually, as the Minister he controls the vote. As the Minister of Education he controls the vote for tertiary education. The responsibility for the mess in education lies squarely on the Minister’s shoulders.

In the meantime, while all this was going on, at least four inquiries were being held into the National Certificate of Educational Achievement debacle. Students were getting scripts and marks for exams they did not sit and no marks for exams they did sit. No scholarships were awarded in some subjects; too many were awarded in others. These estimates had better fix the problem.

Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) : When we look at the State Services Commission we see the mess we have in the public service. I just want to reflect on a little bit of the con job that has been pulled on the New Zealand public on the state of our State sector.

Harry Duynhoven and the Labour Party promised, after the honest speech by Don Brash at Ōrewa about the state of race relations in New Zealand and the waste of the public sector, that they would fix all of that. They promised that all the politically correct nonsense that goes on through the State sector would be gone. They would end any issues around public money being wasted. I would like to know from Harry Duynhoven why he supported the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service spending—

Hon Harry Duynhoven: Because someone had to clean up the mess National had made.

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: What about the $6,600 that was spent on Pacific Island training days in the flashest hotel in Auckland? Harry Duynhoven has interjected that that would help the leaky-home owners. Would he explain to me why $6,600 was spent on hula dancing and kava drinking. That is the sort of politically correct nonsense that Mr Duynhoven and Labour support. It is extraordinary. Mr Duynhoven is getting all excited. I would like him to explain why the State Services Commission is allowing public servants to have Cowboys and Indians parties, Sound of Music parties—

Hon Harry Duynhoven: They paid for them themselves.

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The member said they paid for them themselves. Well, who paid for the drink? The taxpayer. Who paid for the food? The taxpayer. Who paid for the flights? The taxpayer. Who paid for the accommodation? [Interruption]

I think that was the member who made a big deal about Tuku Morgan’s $89 underwear. Was that the same member? [Interruption] He did. I ask Mr Duynhoven why $89 spent on underwear by Tuku Morgan is a big deal, when the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service spent $6,600—that is, $493 per person—on an all-day session on Pacific Island training. Why does he not explain it to me? Why do Weathertight Homes Resolution Service staff need Pacific Island training? Could the member opposite explain that to me? It is sickly political correctness. It shows how rotten the public service is under this Government. It shows why the public should vote the Government out, and why they will do so. It is a mess.

If I have been able to find that whole series of parties within the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service, how many other Government agencies are having Pacific Island training days? If it is good enough for those who are fixing rotten homes, I assume the State Services Commission is also having such training. Is the Ministry of Education? How many other agencies are spending money on hula dancing and kava drinking parties?

Hon Harry Duynhoven: It’s shocking.

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: It is absolutely shocking, and I am yet to receive any apology or any explanation.

Let me tell members why it matters. It matters because people have taken their own lives over the tragedy of leaky homes. There are people whose marriages have broken down. There are hundreds of people facing bankruptcy while George Hawkins has been in charge of this agency. What have we heard from George Hawkins? Is George Hawkins happy, as the Minister in charge of this portfolio area, that taxpayers’ money—$6,600—has been spent on kava drinking and hula dancing at the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service?

What has taken place within the public service is a disgrace. There is waste all over the place. The level of waste within the public service is a total disgrace. Have we heard any explanation from the Government as to why $1.3 billion of public money has been spent on tertiary education courses that people did not attend? That is the sort of level of waste that has gone on under this Government.

When the Minister of State Services was put on the ropes as to why there had been that awful blowout in Te Wānanga o Aotearoa, and the waste in that agency, do members know what he said? He said it was Nick Smith’s fault. Well, that was a good line. I have never been the Minister in charge of tertiary education—never ever. When National left Government, the wānanga got $3.4 million, and Labour grew that to $243 million last year. Where was the State Services Commission? Where was Trevor Mallard when all that waste was going on?

Whether we look at education, at health, at the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service, or at any one of the huge range of Government agencies, we see that the waste that is taking place is something extraordinary. There is a culture of extravagance within this Government that will mean voters will give it the message in 52 days’ time.

Just what has the State Services Commission been doing? If it had been checking, the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service might have been doing its job. We know from the statistics that 3 years after it was promised that the resolution service would provide a quick and cost-effective solution for those poor homeowners, only 10 percent of claims—only 300 claims—have been resolved. Do members know at what cost?

Hon Harry Duynhoven: And which Minister presided over that mess?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: George Hawkins. He is right here; hopefully, he will take a call. George Hawkins has presided over the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service disaster. This Government allows public servants to have parties—all sorts of parties—while people’s homes rot. What have we heard from George Hawkins?

Jill Pettis: We don’t approve of those kinds of parties.

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Oh! Jill Pettis says she does not approve. Well, why did the Government official say yesterday that there had been no waste? Mr Nigel Bickle, the head of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service, says there has been no waste. I ask Jill Pettis whether that is the Government position.

Jill Pettis: We don’t like waste.

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Oh! She says the Government does not like waste. Well, what is it going to do about it? Nothing—absolutely nothing.

What we have is a public service out of control. We have the Government saying in this Parliament that it does not think those sorts of parties are very good. In fact, I think we heard the Minister say that the situation was absurd. Yet we have the head of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service saying it is all OK and there has been no waste. It shows a public service completely out of control—public servants think it is OK to have kava drinking and hula dancing parties during work time at the expense of $493 per staff member. They think that is OK—such is the culture within the State sector.

Well, I have to say to the public of New Zealand that help is on the way. National is going to make sure that public money is spent properly—not on singalong courses, not on twilight golf, not on hula dancing and kava drinking, not on Cowboys and Indians parties. We are going to ensure that public money is spent where it should be spent. It will be spent on the services that matter—that is, on doctors, nurses, and providing New Zealanders with some police so we can have law and order. We will put the emphasis—

Jill Pettis: 10 in Nelson, 10 in Wanganui?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Absolutely! Jill Pettis already knows our policy. She knows we will provide front-line police, so New Zealanders can be safe. We are going to end the culture of extravagance and waste, because New Zealanders have had enough.

MIKE WARD (Green) : Vote Transport has made significant gains, and I would like to suggest the Greens had a role in that. As a consequence of our commitment to working with Labour on transport policy implementation over the last 3 years, there have been substantial improvements in public transport, rail, and cycle and pedestrian initiatives. Rail-track is back in the hands of New Zealand taxpayers once again, and over the next 10 years $200 million of public money will be spent on upgrading that track. The $200 million will be matched by Toll’s investment in rolling stock. For the first time in decades there is a rail strategy. Toll is now able to plan with confidence—most obviously, perhaps, with the deal with Fonterra in Waikato where the rail link to the Waitōtara dairy factory has been reopened and dairy freight has been consolidated and large numbers of heavy trucks are now off the road.

That is a safety issue. It is not just a transport issue, not just an energy issue, or a means of getting freight to the right place more economically. It is a safety issue. Folk out there in their cars know there are fewer big trucks they have to share the road with.

The Green influence is also obvious in last year’s release of the national walking and cycling strategy, and the first-ever dedicated fund for walking and cycling, which is $6 million this year.

We are also encouraged to see the funding for passenger transport. Funding is up from $53 million in 2000-01 to $240 million in just 5 years—up 350 percent. Public transport funding is up 5.5 percent to 15.2 percent of transport funding. We have seen as a consequence skyrocketing public transport patronage, and again the advantages are advantages to everybody, not just those folk who are transport disadvantaged—those who cannot drive, or do not drive—but it is an advantage to those who do drive, with now more room on the roads. I can recall sitting on the train coming in from Porirua and looking out and seeing queues of traffic moving rather slowly.

• Progress reported.
• Report adopted.