7. Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) to the Minister of Education: By how much did students’ reading and writing improve according to the 2008 evaluation of the literacy strategy, outlined at the top of page 18 in the November 2008 briefing to the incoming Minister of Education?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education) : I am advised that the briefing to the incoming Minister was referring to an evaluation of the Literacy Professional Development Project, which began in March 2004. The briefing states: “After taking into account expected growth and maturation, students’ gains in reading and writing were twice those that could be expected without the intervention.” But right throughout the briefing the point is consistently made that the system continues to underperform for a significant minority of students.

Hon Trevor Mallard: What did the dot point under the one the Minister has directly quoted say?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: It states: “Schools accelerated the rate of progress for the majority of the at-risk students by four times the expected rate.” Underneath that, the briefing goes on to state: “Challenges remain. Success for all students requires that every student acquire strong learning foundations in the early years, and remain engaged in learning as they progress through schooling. This is not yet occurring for all students.” This Government knows that one in five students in the system are failing.

Mr SPEAKER: The Minister was asked a very, very simple question. I allowed her to go on for some period of time after she had answered it, but she has gone a little too far.

Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. When a question is as specific as Mr Mallard’s was—it asked the Minister to tell us what is in the first dot point under some other lines and other such—and the Minister then chooses to read out the passage, surely that is complying totally with it. For her to be required to read out only the bit that suits the member asking the question is inappropriate.

Mr SPEAKER: Members asking questions chose their questions. The Minister answering does not choose the question. The member asked a very simple question, and the Minister’s answer went beyond what the member had asked. If the member, who is an experienced member—he is the Leader of the House—checks the Standing Orders, he will find that material beyond that necessary to answer the question should not be included. The Minister answered the question and then went on. I had no objection to her going on for a while, but once she started talking about what her Government was doing, she was well beyond what the question had asked.

I call the Hon Nick Smith for a point of order, and I urge him to read the Standing Orders before he challenges the Speaker.

Hon Dr Nick Smith: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My point is that when a member has asked for a very specific item to be read out, it is the duty of the Minister to ensure that the public is given the proper context. We can all take half-quotes out of reports and create a particular impression. I think it is perfectly proper for a Minister to ensure that the full context of such quotes is—

Mr SPEAKER: I have heard sufficient from the honourable member. Answers are meant to be succinct and relate to the question asked. I allowed the Minister to go on in order to provide context, but once she started to talk about the wonderful things her Government was doing, she was going beyond the question asked. I have to be fair, when Ministers go on for too long in answering, including material beyond that which was asked for. It is the members who are asking questions who have the right to determine what is asked. Ministers do not have the right to say: “Well, I wish they’d asked that.” and give an answer in accordance with that. That is not the way it works.

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am sorry, Mr Speaker, but, in fact, I did not talk about the wonderful things that this Government is doing. If I had done that, I would have referred to the national standards. What I talked about was the one in five—

Mr SPEAKER: I tell the Minister that it would be wise for her to sit down. I will not be trifled with in this way.

Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. A few moments ago while Gerry Brownlee was speaking, you called him to order and he continued to speak. That was—

Mr SPEAKER: The Speaker is the sole judge of these matters, and I do not take that kindly.

Hon Trevor Mallard: When will most students who were in year 1 in 2004, when this programme was introduced, sit National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) level 2?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: When they are ready.

Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER: I tell members of the Government benches that one of them will be leaving the House also, if there is not a little more respect and discipline. The Hon Trevor Mallard, on a point of order.

Hon Trevor Mallard: I will come back to it.

Colin King: Did the briefing to the incoming Minister of Education endorse the Government’s moves to ensure that parents receive information on their child’s progress, in plain language?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: The briefing stated: “Clear reporting of assessment information also promotes transparency within the education system and assists parents to monitor their children’s progress.” The Ministry of Education was recognising, as this Government has recognised, that parents need plain language reports on how their children are progressing and what parents can do to help.

Hon Trevor Mallard: In which year will most students who were in year 1 in 2004 sit NCEA level 2?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Most students are at NCEA level 2 in either year 11 or year 12.

Hon Trevor Mallard: Will those students who will be sitting level 2 in 2015 have the advantage of the professional development that was introduced in 2004 for their entire school career; and why did the Minister not accelerate that professional development to ensure that all kids could have it, rather than take the standards approach?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I am advised that the costs of the Literary Professional Development Project were extremely high, and the required experience is not available on a national scale. In fact, the costs of that project were so high that even in the best of times that the previous Government enjoyed, it did not roll the project out right across the sector. It could not do it, even with all the money it had. The ministry is currently looking at the evidence from that project, and that will inform us as we roll out support for our national standards.

Hon Trevor Mallard: I seek leave to table a document that shows that by 2008, 44 percent of primary and intermediate student teachers had had that training.

Mr SPEAKER: What is the source of this document?

Hon Trevor Mallard: It is the briefing to the incoming Minister.

Mr SPEAKER: But that is publicly available. [Interruption] A point of order is being considered. I have ruled out the tabling of documents that are currently available. I mean, that document was prepared for the current Minister.