The pressure on our Cabinet Ministers is understandable, but on Mike Hosking Breakfast 27th June, Erica Stanford referred to those who had sent her emails as, “whipped up with hatred, frothing at the mouth and spouting complete and utter garbage, lies” - extreme words that fell back on lazy social media slurs. Misinformed or intemperate remarks would have been a small proportion of the messages sent to the Minister. The large majority would have been stating real concerns that the Bill as it stands appears to leave the door open for undue Treaty dominance and continued decolonisation activism in our education system.
The Education and Training Act (2020) and the Amendment Bill (no.2) are problematical as the Treaty is silent on education, and most New Zealanders simply want an education system for all that addresses the very positive objective of Section 127(1) of the Bill, which states, “A board’s paramount objective in governing a school is to ensure that every student at the school is able to attain their highest possible standard in educational achievement.”
While the focus has been on Clause 127(2)(e), Section 9 also needs addressing as it is the foundation for the other Treaty clauses in the Act, and it covers, “The main provisions of this Act that recognise and respect the Crown’s responsibility to give effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi".
Section 127(2)(e), replacing the previous section 9(1) (d), provides that, “in meeting its paramount objective in governing a school, a board must ensure that the school gives effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, including by
(i) achieving equitable outcomes for Māori students; and
(ii) working to ensure that its plans, policies, and teaching and learning programmes reflect local tikanga Māori, mātauranga Māori,and te ao Māori; and
(iii) taking all reasonable steps to make instruction available in tikanga Māori and te reo Māori;”
Surely, a well-functioning education system will achieve “equitable outcomes” for all students, as all have the right to a good education, and there is no need to single out Māori students in 127(2)(e)(i). Moreover, defining who is a Māori student over time is more and more just a cultural choice given the increasing intermingling of ancestry in New Zealand.
It is a great outcome if the provision of Māori cultural content helps Māori students to engage with their wider learning, but Section 127(2)(e) (ii) indicates that all students would be subjected to teaching and learning programmes that reflect local tikanga Māori, mātauranga Māori, and te ao Māori. Such instruction:
(i) Implies the imposition of a single cultural authority (representative of less than 20% of the population) on School classes that have many different ethnicities present.
(ii) Risks continuing decolonisation activism in the classroom, such as presenting a revisionist history of our country or teaching mātauranga Māori as an alternative to rather than a complement to science.
(iii) Tends to absorb learning time that should be tightly focused on literacy, numeracy and science, thus potentially conflicts with Section 127(1).
Given the well-reported decline in New Zealand’s education system over the last 25 years, there is increasing public concern that our education system should simply focus on excellence and achievement, not be captured by, or at risk of capture by, cultural reshaping agendas that have been evident in the Ministry of Education and were accelerated by the previous Labour Government.
Minister Stanford has done good work getting the education curriculum refocused on literacy and numeracy, and knowledge-rich taught content. However, it is difficult to believe that new blanket legislation, yet to appear, will soon deal with Treaty references across numerous policy areas when each one has specific Treaty-relevant issues. For this Bill, why not deal with the problem now and strip out the Treaty references, specifically Section 9 and Section 127(2)(e)?
On 19th February 2022, the NZ Herald reported comments from Labour Deputy Leader of the House, Michael Wood, in regard to the Voices for Freedom Rally against the Government’s Covid 19 Measures at Parliament Buildings. He acknowledged that there were people present with good intentions who had been hurt by the Covid measures but stated that underneath a “river of filth … a river of violence and menace” flowed. At the time the media were only too keen to focus on perceived disruptive elements and ignore the many whose motives for being at the rally were simply around freedom of choice and objection to Government authoritarianism and overreach. Even choosing his words carefully, Michael Wood still managed to be extraordinarily offensive to those whose motives for being present were genuine and seen as valid by many. The failure of the then Government to limit the massive damage to the economy and people’s lives with their Covid-19 measures, and their loss of trust from the electorate, were key reasons for their election loss in 2023.
Erica Stanford may be dealing with difficult political challenges that are unclear to the general public, but giving a blanket pejorative label to people communicating on the Education and Training Act Amendment Bill (No.2) is a big negative for voter support. The next election is little over 15 months away. National must read the room better and understand that most New Zealanders do not want to see the country drift away from democracy and into some form of ethnocracy. Despite some angry or irrational messages to her on the Bill, Minister Stanford should reflect calmly on those that were thoughtful and well-reasoned. New Zealanders want to see her succeed, as she has a huge job in rebuilding a strong education system. But, we need her to take on board that most of those who lobby her do so truthfully, out of real concern for the future of the country, and without an ounce of hatred.
John Raine is an Emeritus Professor of Engineering and has formerly held positions as Pro Vice Chancellor or Deputy Vice Chancellor (Albany and International) in three New Zealand universities.
6 comments:
It is an indictment on our parliament that politicians are calling ordinary citizens "liars', "a river of filth" and "rednecks" just because we, the ordinary plebs, do not agree with their particular agendas. I would hazard a guess that very few citizens want their children to be subjected to Maorification, but rather would prefer them to strive for excellence in the subjects that matter. People are just either unaware this is happening or afraid to speak up. Educationists who really care about New Zealand children should stop trying to minimise this obvious agenda. Social customs and practices should be taught in the home. This National government perpetuates this Maorification leading towards 2040 tribal rule, and I believe they have always intended for this to continue. As Stanford said she has a group of Maori advisors. Luxon also has a group of Maori advisors. Why? For what purpose? Why not Chinese advisors or Indian advisors?
Stanfords inclusion of the treaty clauses is an outlier to her excellent progress in improving our children's education.
Perhaps Goldsmith's demonstrably popular legislative treaty clause eradication is being saved for the election campaign.
If so, he will have to work at breakneck speed compared to his usual snail's pace. Will the 2011 MACA law also get resolved in this tsunami of action? The big problem is: for now it is all talk. Will National actually deliver?
The maori campaign of propoganda and sedition is so well organised I suspect many of the violent messages to Stanford are from maori activists posing as critics with a view to making critics appear wildy irrational and so indirectly encouraging support for rmaori. I have long suspected many Letters to Editor sequences.ditto. The responses (under a maori name) seem too quick and trite to be spontaneous. Maori women in particular regularly demonstrate a superb ability to contort English to their advantage (hence marae ban) and there are a myriad brain washed maori studies students with time to spare and looking for scope to exercise their honed seditous skills.
The National-led govt has, steadily and consistently, failed to live up to the promise it made to its voters. There is no reason to believe this situation will change over the next few months. There is no two major parties are simply two sides of the same bent coin.
Robert makes a good point about the source of violent messaging supposedly from critics. A false flag operation is an act committed with the intent of disguising the actual source of responsibility and pinning blame on another party and we know the left are particularly predisposed to that sort of activity. I commend John Raine for the subject post, it is well balanced and puts the position perfectly. It is to be hoped that Erica Stanford rereads this and reflects on his last paragraph. She and PM Luxon alike ought to dismiss their "Maori advisers" and do some honest thinking for themselves on the well considered feedback this issue has received.
Post a Comment