A question about responsibility and transparency in decision making in the PinoKeyo govt.

 How does the National Party Cabinet make responsible decisions on Education and use of  tax dollars when this happens?

When one reads these stories in the newspaper one does begin to wonder how seriously Key considers rationality and transparency in decision making and use of the taxpayers' dollars as being of high priority in a National-Act govt? 
"Integrated "Private"  schools under investigation for fee charges" and "Despite assets worth millions Prestigious Private school allowed to integrate to prevent it failing."

Should we be adding Wanganui Collegiate to Bill English's list of those who are taking too much from the State and are therefore "bludging"?

I don't think it too much of a stretch to believe that under this National-Act govt this decision  would appear to support the argument that asset retention is great for private enterprise but a low priority for the State as Key & English vigorously pursue selling off NZ's assets to foreign corporations.

The Charter School Con- yet another ACT of economic vandalism.

 YET ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF PINOKEYO'S ECONOMIC VANDALISM- THIS TIME IN EDUCATION

John Banks, the sole member of ACT and it's MP leveraged into power with yet another shonkey PinoKeyo deal over a cup of tea, has landed NZ with the biggest education shill and worst bit of economic vandalism other than John PinoKeyo doing behind closed doors deals with casino operators, smelter operators and film companies that end up loading the taxpayer with the cost over rides and risks. That educational and economic vandalism is the ACT conspiracy to sell off the state school system to the Charter school companies hovering to asset strip one of the best performing education systems in the world.

The UK experience coming from the Tory Party's attack on the State school system is best summed up in this cartoon.

Like Gove in the UK, Hekia is hell bent on dismantling a high performing education system.

The research currently coming out of the USA and the UK proves how dangerous, educationally unsound , socially irresponsible and economically dangerous the policy is.
In the USA the involvement of the Gates family trust determined to foster the Charter School businesses has raised concern among researchers especially as the activities of such "philanthropy" is seen to be negatively influencing education delivery in the USA and in the UK.
In the USA the prime advocate for Charter Schools has now turned around and declared that they are detrimental to the delivery of education because they turn education into a commodity for the benefit of the for profit Charter School businesses instead of concentrating on the real purpose of schools - to educate the community.
Unfortunately for NZ the ideologically blinkered and education philosophy challenged Hekia Parata has not had the political clot in the National-ACT cabinet to slap Banks down and challenge his unresearched allegations and assertions about the NZ education system probably because she is struggling to keep her limited credibility with PinoKeyo alive as the rest of the cabinet conspire for the putsch that will elevate either Collins or Joyce into Key's already questionable hold on the control of the National-ACt party machine.

THE CUP OF TEA, CHARTER SCHOOLS AND BAD POLICY

 WEEPING FOR THE BRIGHTER FUTURE

In 1844 the colony that was to become New Zealand set about providing for the education of the children who would, eventually, become the leaders and builders of the country. The settlers decided that the schools they would establish would be free, secular and be funded by the colonists. They also decided that there should be a single accepted curriculum that would assure the students and community that regardless of where they settled in the country they would receive the same quality education and thus have the same chances as others.

This basic philosophy remained as the foundation of the New Zealand education system through all the reforms and governments throughout the 19th and 20th centuries. Peter Fraser, the Prime Minister and Minister of Education in the Labour Government said that the New Zealand school system should and would give all children a quality education and set about ensuring this would happen.  “Every person, whatever his level of academic ability, whether he be rich or poor, whether he live in town or country, has right as a citizen to a free education of the kind for which he is best fitted, and to the fullest extent of his powers.” This aim was encouraged and developed by the NZ School system and recognised in the results across many international assessments and reports.

Throughout the century the State recognised that there would be those for whom school needed to be linked with the teachings of their church and allowed special character schools to be established. The Catholic, Anglican and Presbyterian churches established a parallel school system, financed by the churches but always ensuring that they taught to the nationally accepted curricula. Over time, these schools have proven to be an expense the churches were unable to support and that if they were to remain as viable institutions some state funding would be needed. Successive governments therefore provided grants and, in the 1970s, allowed the schools to integrate into the State system while still preserving their “special character.”

The Ministry of Education was also willing to encourage school administrations to experiment with different models and structures of schools so that we saw schools like “Four Avenues”, Auckland’s Metropolitan College, and Christchurch’s “Unlimited” evolve and, depending on the community support, either succeed or evolve. At all times, the schools were monitored and supported with advice, resources and an agreed curriculum that would assure the community that the schools were doing their job.

Successive Reports on NZ’s Education system - 1877, 1930, 1947, 1960, 1974 and 1985 all stressed the point that Education was not a political football although,its direction and resourcing had been the scene of factional debate in the different education communities. Regardless of the factional debate the reports acknowledged the unity of purpose and curriculum that made New Zealand’s education system one of the best in the world.

In each report the need to ensure that the State would provide every opportunity to provide a quality education and opportunity for Maori was stressed. Funding and resourcing was always a paramount concern and schools encouraged to explore and develop strategies to   enhance Maori achievement.

 The reports also stressed the importance of having fully trained, fully qualified and well resourced teachers. In fact the Currie Report of 1960 called for the enhancement of the Training Colleges and courses so that Parents, the Students and, above all, the country could be assured of a qualified and trained teaching profession.

So, when on Tuesday night ( 4th June 2013) the National- ACT party forced, with the connivance of the Party-less Peter Dunne and the absent Maori Party, through legislation designed to break down the unified and cohesive education system by financing privately owned profit taking Charter schools that do not have to acknowledge or teach to the agreed and established national curriculum, do not have to guarantee the delivery of a syllabus and lessons by qualified and trained teachers and do not have to answer to the state or community through the Official Information Act or be required to have a community-appointed Board of Trustees to oversee their business one has to question the rationale behind the legislation.

Judging from the debating points made by the National-ACT speakers the real rationale for the imposing of the Charter school system on NZ communities are:

If, like Lewis Carrol's sea captain with a perfectly blank map, we state something is true three times it is true even though all evidence shows that it isnt. 

 to create a platform to relieve the state from the responsibility of supporting schools in the belief that the only way changes happen is through a profit driven free market.

 to undermine and collapse the present teaching profession in the belief that the teacher unions, by calling for critical evaluation of school administration, of the national curricula and demonstrating need for a qualified, trained and resourced profession are too powerful and, thus, a danger to the present government.

 a belief that a trained and qualified teaching profession is not necessary to ensure the delivery of quality education to the students in schools.

 a belief that it is “unfair on local communities and taxpayers” for the State to provide a unified and centrally resourced school system.

 an argument that existing private schools are better and more responsible than public schools and, therefore, similar schools would be better for students and communities. (Interestingly the 1930 Education Report argued that the existence of private fee paying schools were the primary cause of limited education achievement in the Dominion because economics reduced the ability of the workers and community to access quality education.)

 Taxpayers should not be “forced” to fund local state schools because taxpayers do not necessarily support a state school system and should be given the tax money back to create private, profit driven Charter schools.

 that, based on a non-evidence based belief, private profit driven schools will ensure that Maori and Pasifika students will automatically succeed in gaining  more NCEA credits than they achieve in the present State system. This latter argument appears to beg the question as the charter schools won’t have to deliver or adhere to the New Zealand National Curriculum which would mean that students going through the private profit driven schools may not be eligible to access the NCEA assessments which are tied to the national curriculum.

The “Diddums” contribution of the fundamentalist creationist ACT MP, John Banks, to the debate demonstrated the shallowness and irrational thought processes that have led to Charter Schools being imposed on New Zealand communities, coupled with the incompetence of the current minister when it comes to the running of the Ministry of Education and I weep and worry for the futures of my grandchildren.

DISINGENUINOUS OR IGNORANT?

Disingenuinousness from a National Party Hack

I recently got a “survey”, funded from my hard earned taxes, from the local National - ACT MP asking for opinions about the policies implemented by the John "Pinnochio" Key government.

As our local MP spends much of his time in Parliament as a smirking presence behind whichever Minister is speaking then marching into the lobby as instructed one wonders why he bothers to “survey” the voters in the electorate as he wouldn’t be taking the results into any regard anyway.

Anyway, the survey, which caused much mirth in my household, asked if we believed that the Key directed National-ACT govt had policies that worked to boost skills and support jobs... when we have witnessed a growing % of the population recorded as unemployed from the low base of 2008. The promised 120,000 jobs that have been promised since 2009 have not materialised despite the continued bleating by the Finance Minister.

It then asked if we believed that the National-ACT govt had invested in science & innovation when successive budgets have paid lip-service to the “policy” with words rather than convincing investment in the Research & Innovation.

He then went on to ask if we believed that his govt had been effective in developing export markets, ( a very moot point as we have only grown our export market by 0.8%  in the first three months of this year... which is hardly a ringing endorsement of any growth policy coming from the present govt.) rolling out faster broadband and investing in roads and rail. This last point caused even greater mirth especially as the National-ACT govt has caused the closure of the Hillside Railway Workshops in Dunedin, effectively stopped KiwiRail contracting to build rolling stock designed for the NZ rail system and spent a great deal of time deliberately stymieing the Auckland City Council developing an efficient public transport system based on light rail on the grounds that building more roads to holiday destinations makes greater economic sense even though the cost analyses of the road building schemes has proven them uneconomic.

He then has the cheek to ask if we believe that selling shares in the state owned energy companies is one that would boost the economy..... when one considers that 300,000 people, and growing, people have signed a petition calling for a referendum to stop the sale of the country’s assets his ignorance of economics and public resistance to this policy knows no bounds. When public documents have shown that the first Energy company that has been “partially” privatised has ended up being owned by 113,000 so called “mum and dad” investors who bought Mighty River shares earlier this month were companies, trusts and investment institutions then one can see that this “legalised theft” of the state’s assets will not be building a stronger economy... at least not for the taxpayers who funded and built the energy State owned Enterprises in the first place.

As this press release shows:

Govt admits asset sales program in deep trouble
National has admitted that its asset sales programme is a failure with its decision to consider selling Meridian Energy in blocks, Green Party Co-leader Dr Russel Norman said today.
Media reports suggest Meridian’s 49% shareholding may be sold down in blocks by the National Government.
“As shares in Mighty River Power hit a new low, the Key Government knows it cannot sell 49% of Meridian Energy in one hit in the current climate,” Dr Norman said today
“Unfortunately, rather than biting the bullet and calling a complete halt to its asset sales program it is pushing ahead with a foolish plan to sell Meridian Energy in chunks.
“The Mighty River Power sale was a mighty flop and the Key Government knows that pushing ahead with another sale will result in even fewer shares going to ‘mum and dad investors’.
“Despite spending millions on advertising the truth is that 98 percent of New Zealanders bought no shares in Mighty River Power at all. …
“It is time for the Key Government to listen to the concerns of commentators, the business community and ordinary New Zealanders and cancel its economically disastrous asset sales program.”

I doubt, though, that our local MP, who would be more at home in the NZ equivalent of the Republican Tea Party - the ACT Party would be able to understand these basic economics and reactions.

Anyway, to continue with the “survey” from our local MP. He then asks if we agree with the Labour-Green proposal to “nationalise” the electricity industry. A question that again demonstrates the economic ignorance of the individual. If he had any wit he would have realised that we have always had a State Owned Electricity industry.. built and maintained by the New Zealand taxpayer but, now, under the neo-liberal policies of his Party being stolen from the country,stolen from the taxpayers and partially removed from contributing to the economy by being sold off to foreign corporates disguised as”mum and dad” investors as this story from the Stuff website shows.

A small number of wealthy investors including businesses and trusts snapped up nearly half the Mighty River Power shares set aside for retail buyers, sparking accusations the Government's sales pitch about selling to "mum and dad investors" was a cynical ploy.
An analysis of the partial float reveals that 101,000 "mum and dad" shareholders were allocated just 13.4 per cent of the former state- owned enterprise. Roughly the same amount went to a much smaller group of wealthy investors, charities, businesses and superannuation funds.
The figures, confirmed by Treasury, show that of the 113,000 retail investors who paid $912 million for shares at $2.50 each, 12,844 buyers who represented the top 10.9 per cent bought roughly half the retail pool. They invested an average $34,618.
Of those, a select sub- group of 394 investors bought $90m worth of shares in parcels of more than 100,000 shares - an average investment of $228,865.
While some were wealthy individuals, they included companies, superannuation funds, trusts, boutique investment firms, funds from deceased estates, sports clubs, small businesses and charities.

Of course our local MP is also somewhat free with the meanings of words, I’ll be charitable and allow myself to believe that it is because he doesn’t have a large vocabulary so therefore doesn’t understand the policy under pinning of the NZ Power policy announced by Labour with the support of the Greens.

The policy is directed to creating a single regulatory body that will purchase the electricity generated by the Power companies (once known as SOES)   at a price that is based on the real costs of generation rather than the fictional cost, created by the “reforms” developed by the then Minister of Energy, Bradford, and instituted by the National Govt in the 1990s, presently used that pegs the price of power to the cost of the most expensive form of generation - burning coal & natural gas rather than the costs from hydro generation. This policy, based on the system we presently use for the purchase of pharmaceuticals, will bring the power bills down by 5-7% a year while giving impetus to the creation of more than 5000 jobs and boosting the economy by some $450 million.

The Labour-Green policy is, therefore, not one of nationalisation but one of rationalisation... a distinction one doesn’t expect our local MP to be able to comprehend of course.

The rest of his “survey” attempts to discover if anyone believes that the moves to constrain and limit the quality of education delivered by our schools through the imposition of the constant testing regime of “national standards” is benefitting our children. If he cared to read the available research he would realise that the importation of largely discredited testing regimes, even dressed up as “national standards”, will not provide meaningful data on our children’s progress and educational achievement.... but then he is also a believer that the importation of Charter Schools which will not be answerable to the Ministry of Education, will not have to employ qualified and registered teachers and will not have to use or deliver the New Zealand National curriculum is a wise and well thought out policy... so what can one say, apart from I despair??