Submission

30 November 2004

To:

Education and Science Select Committee Verbal submission by Jo-Anne Stokes on University Establishment

I introduce myself as the Executive Officer of Rural Women New Zealand. Rural Women New Zealand represents 20% of women involved in a rural industry in New Zealand. It is a nationwide organisation, which will celebrate 80 years of existence next year. RWNZ was previously known as Women's Division Federated Farmers.

The reason for our submission concerns the objective of the establishment of universities as they relate to the agricultural industry. We noted the lack of definition in the objectives of university establishment. In the agriculture industry, the jobs are there but not the skill base. We note that the Minister must consult tertiary institutions to when applying for University status but does not specifically mention industry groups that provide the jobs for the graduates, consumer groups that fund tertiary bursaries, promote the industry such as RWNZ and other such specific industry groups

With regard to the Minister of Education deciding on national interest grounds whether an application should proceed, we would object to such powers. We note the lack of liaison with industry has given rise to the removal of the Agriculture and Horticultural subjects from NCEA scholarship curriculum. The ‘degrading ‘ of these subjects to only bursary level has highlighted the lack of judgement and put the agriculture industry on the backfoot in terms of encouraging skilled people into this industry.

Further the Minster of Education with wide ranging powers has removed incentives for agriculture due to removal and centralising of rural primary and secondary schools from their rural base. This further discourages our young people from choosing rural careers. Further powers to the Minister in the bill allows the Minister to veto applications for university establishment and with the current powers already afforded to this position and the results for rural RWNZ feel uneasy with this ‘catch all' phrase of the bill.

With the objectives being undefined there is less certainty in an industry, such as agriculture, that our economic needs for educated agricultural graduates would be met.

We note that our area of applied science is sadly lacking when key researchers move to other agricultural producing nations having been trained and exposed to research techniques and advanced farming systems that are here in New Zealand. They take our competitive advantage and we do not have the emphasis on applied science in our universities to replace them when our education system is subjected to vagaries of establishment.

The current funding structure is geared to the commerce sector – which has economic benefits but not the actual industry focused applied science sector.

The question of a lid being placed on the number of Universities in NZ should note that as scientific technologies advance and so should the education sector to provide for industry. Quality through the New Zealand Qualifications Authority should be maintained but choice driven by industry should not be limited. Many schools start as Colleges- Massey and Lincoln being examples and have gained international recognition prior to University status and now as universities are international leaders in their specific applied science expertise. To survive and get funding they have diversified into other areas of education that they not necessarily expert in.

The competitive nature of universities has added the skill and research capacities and at the same time co-operative nature in establishing degree courses with relevance to industry. Providing the quality is there – there seems no limit warranted on the number of universities. Teaching standards and research standards are required to maintain a sense of quality of a degree coming out of Universities or other institutions. The number would seem irrelevant.

In Summary we would note that changes to the bill should be:

•  The definition of objectives of the bill should be spelt out succinctly to include industry and consumer consultation.

•  Revoke the provision of the Minister of Education being able to determine the ‘national interest' of a university.

•  Recognition of the future of applied sciences to the competitive nature of our key industry, agriculture,

•  Note taken that industry should have a say in the vision and future focus of universities.

Thank you for taking the time to hear our perspective on the bill

Questions:

Q. Do you feel that the restrospective nature of the bill will disadvantage current applicants ?

RWNZ did not seek specific views of members about the retrospective nature of the bill.

Q. Do you think Universities such as Lincoln would have been afforded University status under this bill?

No- Lincoln is 25km from Canterbury , had 1500 or less students at time of application and concentrated on Agriculture/Horticulture already in another university at Massey. The ‘National Interest' clause of this bill would undoubtedly have been invoked from this bill.

Q. Do you feel that agriculture is relegated to a trade?

Yes, there is little understanding of the technical and commercial nature of farming and it is seen as a trade, this is born out by the parliamentary debate on this particular bill which mentioned Telford Polytechnic in those terms of trade and showed a lack of understanding what such learning institutions provide.

Q; As a graduate of Massey I feel that there is simply not enough agriculture students to warrant expenditure in this area.

Agriculture supplying 65% of the Countries GDP in response the government has gone about urbanising rural schools, removal of Agriculture/Hort scholarship from NCEA and there has been no assistance afforded to this key economic sector in early childhood. It is a chicken and egg situation that if you do not promote such subjects at primary and secondary school you will not get the graduates. Nothing has changed in the perception of Agriculture when I decided on my own career path 25 years ago in agriculture. Efforts were made to deter me, despite the fact in the hard economic times of the 80's there were 3 jobs for every graduate. Not so for the history degree I was encouraged to pursue. This type of career advice has not changed with New Zealand producing more accountants and lawyers than any other country on a per capita basis. Yet, agricultural graduates will have at least 5 jobs to choose from on graduation.

Thanked

Rural Women New Zealand

PO Box 12021

Thorndon

Phone 04 473 5524

E-Mail : Jo-Anne.Stokes@ruralwomen.org.nz

website; www.ruralwomen.org