 |
Leader's Letter
March 2003
NCEA Fee Increases
Members will have heard a great deal about the new school qualifications system, NCEA (National Certificate of Educational Achievement).
New Zealand First was involved in the conception and design of NCEA during its time in coalition government.
Unfortunately there have been serious deficiencies in the implementation and we have been at pains to pressure the government to do it right.
The greatest blunder the government has made has been to increase entrance fees this year from $70 to $150. In fact, it has been dramatically increasing fees since it got into power. In 2000 it cost parents $25 for their child to enter four subjects in Sixth Form Certificate, in 2003 it will cost $150.
The families that are going to be hurt are not those dependent on benefits (they only pay $35).
A recent study showed that in 2002 many children from low–income families did not enter for school qualifications because their parents could not afford to pay the fees. The decision to double fees is going to make the situation worse.
The Government’s decision to increase NCEA fees for 2003 is a disgrace and shows that Labour is no longer concerned for the working class – it is only concerned about the non–working class.
New Zealand First is the only party which has strenuously voiced its concerns about the implications of this “qualifications tax”. And we will continue to do so. Already members of the Labour caucus have expressed their embarrassment.
Rt Hon Winston Peters has emphasised that New Zealand First would slash fees to ensure no child was locked out of an education because of the circumstances of his/her parents. Meanwhile we will continue to pressure the Government in an effort to get it to reverse its decision on the level of fees for 2003.
Hon Brian Donnelly MP
Education Spokesperson
Prostitution Law Reform Bill
True to the theme, “That without a united society all our hopes, aspirations and dreams will count for nothing,” I commend all our New Zealand First caucus in voting against the, “Prostitution Law Reform Bill”.
The structure of any society is built upon the family unit. How it conducts its affairs and the teachings within the family unit is paramount to the future and success of this nation.
To all throughout the nation who lobbied against this Bill we appreciate your support. Our nation’s greatest asset is our people and we will only reach our potential if we are governed with integrity.
Membership of two Caucus committees (1) Treaty of Waitangi (2) Law and Order allow me to focus on two of the specific promises we made during the election campaign. We are all aware that New Zealand First continues to promote our immigration policy.
My priority as spokesperson for Maori Affairs is to concentrate on Education in conjunction with Health, Employment and Housing.
If there is to be a happy future for all people, independence will only be established for families through the concepts of education and being skilled. What follows is the ability to provide for the needs of family such as housing, health and employment and then our economy grows in all directions.
Let me assure all members of the New Zealand First Party that we as your representatives are working to our full capacity and are doing this in a manner that is smart. Again to you all I express my kind regards.
Bill Gudgeon MP
Television Charter
New Zealand First unsuccessfully moved an amendment to include a provision that the charter feature programming of a family nature that supports the family and the development of family life in New Zealand.
Labour, Act and the Greens voted against the amendment. There is no reference in the Charter to the family.
Labour has supported more gambling, the reduction of the drinking age, a good number of its members support the Prostitution Bill and so it is no surprise that Labour does not support the family.
Dail Jones MP
Dog Control Bill
The dreadful injuries sustained by seven year old Carolina Anderson after she had been mauled by a dog were the worst I have seen, and I have seen many injuries portrayed in graphic detail in Courtroom documents.
The American Staffordshire terrier was allowed to run loose on a Reserve on which dogs were not permitted.
The Government’s kneejerk reaction was the wrong approach. It returned a Dog Control Bill, which was sitting on the
Parliamentary Order Paper for three years, back to the Local Government Select Committee. This is the busiest committee in Parliament having 11 bills in to consider already so we cannot see it coming back to the House in 12 months.
It would be quicker for the Government to introduce a fresh Bill into Parliament and send it to the less pressured Government Administration Select Committee, rather than adopt its present approach.
There is another problem with the Bill. It does not fully consider the steps which need to be taken to remedy the problem of potentially dangerous dogs running loose and causing serious injury.
The present bill states that an American Pit–bull terrier is a restricted dog. Upon receiving advice that the dog
is a restricted dog (subject to appeal), the owner of a restricted animal must keep the dog within a securely fenced portion of his/her property and must not allow the dog to be at large or in any public place or in any private way without being muzzled.
The owner must establish that the dog is or has been neutered.
The maximum penalty for a breach of this provision remains the same – a fine of $1500 so what was the point of the amendment?
The damage which is done far exceeds any such penalty.
I tried to put before Parliament an amendment to the Bill calling for tougher dog controls including increased fines and severe jail sentences.
I believe that a dog should be treated just the same as any other violent weapon, e.g. a baseball bat or a gun.
The Government has had four years to do something about dangerous dogs but has so far done nothing except make a lot of noise and blame others.
The Bill should have been kept in the House and amended, just as the Government proposes amending the Prostitution Bill. It is funny how the Labour Party can amend the Prostitution laws but not laws which relate to serious injury to young children and others.
Again, the Labour Government considerably altered the Television Bill in the committee stage. The same actions could have been taken with the dog legislation.
New Zealand First is in the process of drafting a Private Member’s bill to ensure this matter proceeds quickly. How many other young children or adults have to be mauled or even killed before this government acts promptly?
Dail Jones MP
|
|
