National's Michael Woodhouse. Photo: ©VNP / Phil Smith
The National Party has questioned the competence of Education Minister Jan Tinetti, after she was found to have misled Parliament through gross negligence.
Tinetti apologised to the House yesterday after the Privileges Committee found she had misled parliament by failing to correct statements to the House. However, she was not found guilty of contempt of Parliament because it was not deliberate.
Under questioning from the Opposition in February, she had said she had no responsibility for the release of school attendance data - but was told by staff later that day her office had been involved in discussions about when to release it. Tinetti did not correct her statements until May.
The committee this week found she was not guilty of contempt, but had misled parliament due to a "high degree of negligence".
Tinetti declined an invitation to speak to Morning Report on Friday. National Party shadow leader of the House Michael Woodhouse told the programme the matter was a reputation issue for Parliament, and "particularly embarrassing" because it involved the minister responsible for the future of education in New Zealand.
Tinetti forced to apologise for 'high degree of negligence'
He said Tinetti's apology was appropriate, but the fact it even happened was problematic.
"What I can't get my head around is how this even occurred," Woodhouse said. "And it shows a gross ignorance: A, of what was going on in her office; and B of what her responsibilities are, not only as a minister but as a member of parliament.
"And the reason is this - in order for the committee to reach its findings of not deliberately misleading the house, it had to accept three things: Firstly, that she had no idea what was going on in her office between January and the 21 February, including conversations with the prime minister's office; and then on 21st of February when the big policy on truancy was announced she told two breakfast TV shows that the data would be released later that day - she told the committee that she'd made that up under pressure from interviewing.
"And then thirdly, when people in her office pointed out that her [answer to the] question may have been misleading, she believed that she didn't need to correct it, because she believed it to be true at the time that she gave the answer - and those three things really made it difficult for me to get my head around, the idea that all of that could be true and that that wasn't deliberate."
Woodhouse said the investigation showed Tinetti's actions were "clearly grossly negligent, both of what was going on in her office and of her duties".
"I fear for our young. I think if this is the quality of the competence at the head of our education system who's influencing resources, influencing curriculum, I really do worry that we have that level of incompetence at the top."
Woodhouse said the Privileges Committee was made up of members of ACT, Labour, the Greens and National, and it was important members of parliament be held to account for what was said in the house.
"Members have a high degree of freedom of expression and speech in the house, but that comes with a responsibility, to be honest, in its dealings and to correct things that can go wrong," he said.
"In the heat of the moment it's not unusual for a statement to be made that's misleading. The obligation is on all of us to correct that when it's pointed out to us. That did not happen, and that is an important thing that the privileges committee is there to rule on."
Parliament will hold a debate on the matter and the Privileges Committee's conclusions when Parliament returns in the week of 17 July.