The legislative relationship between New Zealand education and the Treaty of Waitangi is a recent one.
Up till 1989 there was no reference to it at all in the prevailing Education Act. It was taught as part of the history curriculum, although most classroom experiences will be of it being glossed over under three headings – Māori chiefs said Britain could take over New Zealand, they could keep their own land unless they sold it to the Crown, and everybody who lived in New Zealand had the same rights.
It sounds eerily similar to what David Seymour was trying to promote with his Treaty Principles Bill.
The fourth Labour government overhauled education administration in 1989 (Tomorrow’s Schools anyone), introduced a Board of Trustees for each individual school and included Section 16 headed Cultural diversity, Treaty of Waitangi, tikanga Māori and te reo Māori.
Back then a school board was required “to act in a manner consistent with the principles of the Treaty” and to take all reasonable steps to provide instruction in tikanga and te reo for fulltime students whose parents ask for it.
That system seemed to tick along well enough for thirty years. The Kohanga Reo total immersion pre-schools started in 1982 and the first Kura Kaupapa opened in 1985. Those that wanted an infusion of Māori culture and language could get it if they asked or if they went to an appropriate establishment.
But the Labour - New Zealand First government, with support from the Greens and Te Pati Māori changed matters considerably in 2020 with much stronger language regarding the Treaty, tikanga, matauranga Maori, te ao Maori and te reo.
Section 127 of the 2020 Act sets out the primary objectives for a board in governing a school. The first of them is that every student is able to attain their highest possible standard in educational achievement. That’s logical and fair.
But then the Act stipulates that the school “gives effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, including by working to ensure that (i) its plans, policies, and local curriculum reflect local tikanga Māori, mātauranga Māori, and te ao Māori; and (ii) taking all reasonable steps to make instruction available in tikanga Māori and te reo Māori; and (iii) achieving equitable outcomes for Māori students.”
Earlier, Section 5 of the Act says that among the education objectives are the need
“to instil, in each child and young person, an appreciation of the importance of the inclusion of different groups and persons with different personal characteristics, diversity, cultural knowledge, identity, and the different official languages and Te Tiriti o Waitangi and te reo Māori.”
A quick look through the current Act or the Amendment Bill has very few uses of the phrase “principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.” That’s pedantic but possibly significant. More later.
The current Coalition government is now considering the Education and Training Amendment Bill No 2.
The new Section 127 has some not-so-subtle changes to the language of the 2020 Act which actually go further than the current Act on the matter of teaching matters Māori.
The Amendment Bill states that a school board’s paramount objective is that every student is able to attain their highest possible standard. Worthy and fair.
But the Bill then says that to meet the paramount objective, a board must meet supporting objectives.
Among those supporting objectives, which a school is compelled to meet, is that it must give effect to the Treaty of Waitangi by achieving equitable outcomes for Māori students, ensure that its learning programmes reflect local tikanga, matauranga Māori and te ao Māori and that reasonable steps are taken to ensure instruction is available in te reo Māori.
Quite how the paramount objective and the compulsory supporting objectives meet other aspects of the Education and Training Act is unclear, and not properly thought through by politicians and bureaucrats.
You see, ever since the groundbreaking Education Act of 1877, educational instruction in New Zealand state schools has been free and secular. In other words the taxpayer will fund it, and it will be free from religious and spiritual instruction unless parents agree - for those under 16 - and 16 year olds and above agree themselves, or opt out.
By legislating that a school must ensure its learning programmes “reflect local tikanga, matauranga Māori and te ao Māori ..” this Amendment Bill is breaking with the longstanding principle of secular education.
The definition of matauranga Māori is a “body of knowledge, of beliefs, of the interconnectedness of all things, both tangible and intangible, including the spiritual and metaphysical.”
Those are not secular concepts . Anything that teaches the spiritual and the metaphysical is surely outside the realm of secularism. Therefore that compulsory supporting objective to the paramount objective should not exist in the Amendment Bill.
Yet when Hobson’s Pledge points out what is effectively an entrenchment of the teaching of Māori knowledge, of the so-called holistic worldview that focuses on customary Maori values and lore, the Minister of Education lets loose with hysteria.
Here’s a few quotes from Erica Stanford’s appearance on Newstalk ZB.
“They are whipped up with hatred and lies .. they are yelling at the sky .. frothing at the mouth with hatred .. it’s utter rubbish.”
Really Minister? Me thinks you doth protest too much.
When asked if there was too much Māori in schools, the pause before she answered was one you could have a paddled a waka through. Finally she began her response with “it depends …”
A final and pedantic point: The National-New Zealand First Coalition Agreement says there will be a comprehensive review of all legislation that includes “The Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi” and replace all such references with specific words relating to the relevance of the Treaty.
The irony is that the current Act and the Amendment Bill hardly use the word “principles.” Instead the language is that the Bill “must give effect to the Treaty of Waitangi.”
Technically New Zealand First may have been linguistically snookered. The fear now is, despite the “one law for all” rhetoric from Winston Peters and Shane Jones this legislation will sail through unimpeded.
By her Newstalk ZB appearance Erica Stanford has firmly nailed her colours to the mast.
Sigh.
Peter Williams was a writer and broadcaster for half a century. Now watching from the sidelines. Peter blogs regularly on Peter’s Substack - where this article was sourced.
The fourth Labour government overhauled education administration in 1989 (Tomorrow’s Schools anyone), introduced a Board of Trustees for each individual school and included Section 16 headed Cultural diversity, Treaty of Waitangi, tikanga Māori and te reo Māori.
Back then a school board was required “to act in a manner consistent with the principles of the Treaty” and to take all reasonable steps to provide instruction in tikanga and te reo for fulltime students whose parents ask for it.
That system seemed to tick along well enough for thirty years. The Kohanga Reo total immersion pre-schools started in 1982 and the first Kura Kaupapa opened in 1985. Those that wanted an infusion of Māori culture and language could get it if they asked or if they went to an appropriate establishment.
But the Labour - New Zealand First government, with support from the Greens and Te Pati Māori changed matters considerably in 2020 with much stronger language regarding the Treaty, tikanga, matauranga Maori, te ao Maori and te reo.
Section 127 of the 2020 Act sets out the primary objectives for a board in governing a school. The first of them is that every student is able to attain their highest possible standard in educational achievement. That’s logical and fair.
But then the Act stipulates that the school “gives effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, including by working to ensure that (i) its plans, policies, and local curriculum reflect local tikanga Māori, mātauranga Māori, and te ao Māori; and (ii) taking all reasonable steps to make instruction available in tikanga Māori and te reo Māori; and (iii) achieving equitable outcomes for Māori students.”
Earlier, Section 5 of the Act says that among the education objectives are the need
“to instil, in each child and young person, an appreciation of the importance of the inclusion of different groups and persons with different personal characteristics, diversity, cultural knowledge, identity, and the different official languages and Te Tiriti o Waitangi and te reo Māori.”
A quick look through the current Act or the Amendment Bill has very few uses of the phrase “principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.” That’s pedantic but possibly significant. More later.
The current Coalition government is now considering the Education and Training Amendment Bill No 2.
The new Section 127 has some not-so-subtle changes to the language of the 2020 Act which actually go further than the current Act on the matter of teaching matters Māori.
The Amendment Bill states that a school board’s paramount objective is that every student is able to attain their highest possible standard. Worthy and fair.
But the Bill then says that to meet the paramount objective, a board must meet supporting objectives.
Among those supporting objectives, which a school is compelled to meet, is that it must give effect to the Treaty of Waitangi by achieving equitable outcomes for Māori students, ensure that its learning programmes reflect local tikanga, matauranga Māori and te ao Māori and that reasonable steps are taken to ensure instruction is available in te reo Māori.
Quite how the paramount objective and the compulsory supporting objectives meet other aspects of the Education and Training Act is unclear, and not properly thought through by politicians and bureaucrats.
You see, ever since the groundbreaking Education Act of 1877, educational instruction in New Zealand state schools has been free and secular. In other words the taxpayer will fund it, and it will be free from religious and spiritual instruction unless parents agree - for those under 16 - and 16 year olds and above agree themselves, or opt out.
By legislating that a school must ensure its learning programmes “reflect local tikanga, matauranga Māori and te ao Māori ..” this Amendment Bill is breaking with the longstanding principle of secular education.
The definition of matauranga Māori is a “body of knowledge, of beliefs, of the interconnectedness of all things, both tangible and intangible, including the spiritual and metaphysical.”
Those are not secular concepts . Anything that teaches the spiritual and the metaphysical is surely outside the realm of secularism. Therefore that compulsory supporting objective to the paramount objective should not exist in the Amendment Bill.
Yet when Hobson’s Pledge points out what is effectively an entrenchment of the teaching of Māori knowledge, of the so-called holistic worldview that focuses on customary Maori values and lore, the Minister of Education lets loose with hysteria.
Here’s a few quotes from Erica Stanford’s appearance on Newstalk ZB.
“They are whipped up with hatred and lies .. they are yelling at the sky .. frothing at the mouth with hatred .. it’s utter rubbish.”
Really Minister? Me thinks you doth protest too much.
When asked if there was too much Māori in schools, the pause before she answered was one you could have a paddled a waka through. Finally she began her response with “it depends …”
A final and pedantic point: The National-New Zealand First Coalition Agreement says there will be a comprehensive review of all legislation that includes “The Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi” and replace all such references with specific words relating to the relevance of the Treaty.
The irony is that the current Act and the Amendment Bill hardly use the word “principles.” Instead the language is that the Bill “must give effect to the Treaty of Waitangi.”
Technically New Zealand First may have been linguistically snookered. The fear now is, despite the “one law for all” rhetoric from Winston Peters and Shane Jones this legislation will sail through unimpeded.
By her Newstalk ZB appearance Erica Stanford has firmly nailed her colours to the mast.
Sigh.
Peter Williams was a writer and broadcaster for half a century. Now watching from the sidelines. Peter blogs regularly on Peter’s Substack - where this article was sourced.
6 comments:
Staford has also demonstrated - beyond doubt - that she is totally unfit for the post of NZ Education Minister - and, politically biased as well. Luxon's A team is unravelling.
It's all a bit like Finlayson saying that anybody who doesn't agree with him is a "redneck". this seems to be the new default position for those who have no substantive argument. Well, we need to support those other New Zealanders who want their children to achieve in a global environment. We want to be a small progressive country not to just become another ho hum Pacific island....don't we? These people like Stanford and Finlayson are so inward looking.
Sanford saying " “They are whipped up with hatred and lies .. they are yelling at the sky .. frothing at the mouth with hatred .. it’s utter rubbish.” will go down as her "deplorables " moment. That is, the same as Clinton referring to Trump supporters as "deplorables"
Stanford could easily remove this crap from this legislation.
She has decided (just like Ardern's captain's calls) that all our children need to be indoctrinated in everything Maori.
Why ?
That's the biggest question - is she just obeying Luxon's orders, or does really believe that Stone Age culture should be the base level for every educational institution ?
Before long she is going to be despised as much as Ardern.
What an appalling , prepared, staged performance by Stanford this morning on Hosking's radio interview !!
Completely rubbishing the people who voted for her - they won't make that mistake again.
Gaze around National, especially Stanford and understand that most of the violence in the world is created by ethnic and religious factions.
When is that violence break out here ?
And this is the centre right doing this.. Imagine how bad things will become under the hard left's option. Perhaps english will be banned altogether as being a racist langiage in schools.
Post a Comment