Arrow Right Arrow Left Bsky Calendar Close Facebook Home Instagram LinkedIn Members Hub Newsletter Plus Search Toggle X

Submissions

NZ Parliament Education and Training Amendment Bill (No 2)

Posted in Submission, Government; Tagged Education, Accessibility; Posted 10 months ago by DPA Less than a minute to read

Print

To: NZ Parliament
Date: June 2025

 

Purpose

This joint submission by the Disabled Persons Assembly (DPA) and the National Disabled Students' Association (NDSA) opposes the Education and Training Amendment Bill (No 2) 2025 and asks the Education and Workforce Select Committee to recommend that it not proceed. Their goal is to protect the rights and interests of disabled students, Māori students (tāngata whaikaha, tāngata whaiora, Turi Māori), and other marginalized groups within the education system, particularly concerning the downgrading of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, the emphasis on academic achievement, prescriptive attendance policies, and the lack of safeguards for reasonable restrictions to be placed on freedom of expression in universities.

Summary of DPA submission

DPA and NDSA oppose the Education and Training Amendment Bill (No 2) 2025, requesting its withdrawal. They highlight that almost 220,000 disabled students were enrolled at all levels of the education and training system in 2023, making their concerns highly relevant to a significant population group.

A major point of opposition is the proposed repeal of section 9(1)b and the demotion of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and te reo Māori within school objectives (new section 127(2)(e)). DPA and NDSA argue that relegating the status of Te Tiriti poses a real risk to programmes and policies which support tāngata whaikaha, tāngata whaiora, and Turi Māori learners, undermining efforts to address the multiple systemic inequities faced by these groups of ākonga (learners) within the education system.

They strongly oppose making academic achievement the paramount objective that all school boards must meet. While not questioning the importance of academic achievement, they believe section 5(4)(a) of the existing Act already covers this sufficiently, and making it "paramount" effectively demotes other crucial objectives. These broader purposes include developing resilience, social skills, and participation in community life, as well as adhering to the Bill of Rights Act and Human Rights Act, and eliminating racism, stigma, bullying, and other discrimination, all of which are vital for disabled ākonga and their families.

While supporting efforts to improve school attendance, DPA and NDSA oppose the Bill's more prescriptive approach of using attendance management plans. They note that disabled students and students with health conditions experience greater barriers to school attendance (e.g., health appointments, bullying) and require more support and flexible learning environments. They fear that prescriptive plans, based on national guidelines, could lead to more punitive approaches, which would be detrimental to the human rights and interests of disabled students and their families.

DPA is extremely concerned about requiring university councils to develop and adopt statements setting out freedom of expression policies given the lack of safeguards in the bill. They argue that unrestrained free speech can be dangerous and particularly harmful for students and staff from marginalised groups, including disabled people, and could undermine the legislatively mandated Code of Pastoral Care 2021 designed to protect student welfare and wellbeing. Sections 281A(c) and 281A(d) are seen as essentially restricting universities' discretion over speakers and topics, potentially enabling the incitement of hostility based on disability or other characteristics.

 

Key Recommendation/Finding:

DPA and NDSA asks that Sections 281A and 281B (requiring universities to adopt statements on freedom of expression) be completely removed from the legislation.

 

Supporting Statement 1:

Unrestrained free speech can be dangerous and particularly harmful for students and staff from marginalised groups, including disabled students and staff, and could undermine the legislatively mandated Code of Pastoral Care 2021.

 

Supporting Statement 2:

These provisions are unnecessary given that academic freedom for universities is already provided for under Section 267 of the Education and Training Act and is currently being exercised in a responsible manner.

 

 
 

Download

DPA Submission 2506 NZ Parliament Education and Training Amendment Bill (No 2) (DOCX)

Related submissions

Related content