The Government’s move to scrap this nebulous requirement and replace it with something genuinely revolutionary focusing on actual educational outcomes is the kind of common sense that’s felt almost extinct in Wellington. Kids turning up to school, learning to read, write, and count, and leaving with qualifications that matter in the real world should never have been controversial. Yet for years, any attempt to prioritise basic literacy and numeracy over ideological box-ticking was treated like heresy. It’s refreshing to see a shift back toward sanity.
Of course, the professional outrage industry reacted exactly as predicted. Within minutes, the usual commentators burst into action, declaring an “erosion of partnership,” a “step backward,” and the classic “an attack on Māori education.” But perhaps it’s time to ask a question that no one in the bureaucracy seems willing to touch: was the Treaty ever intended to function as a compulsory group project in the first place? The Treaty is a compact between the Crown and Māori as sovereign entities it is not a homework assignment for primary school principals, nor a moral checklist for teachers marking Year 7 geography.
Treaties around the world follow a remarkably consistent pattern: the Crown governs, and the people all of them are governed. Somehow, only in New Zealand has this morphed into a belief that every citizen, institution, and school board must act as co-governor, cultural interpreter, and part time constitutional theorist. Removing the requirement for schools to “give effect to the Treaty” doesn’t erase Māori culture from classrooms. It simply rolls back the ideological overreach that turned education into activism. Culture can be taught, history can be understood, and respect can be shown without forcing teachers to wade through political frameworks they never signed up for.
Meanwhile, the same people who hyperventilate about “erasing Māori culture” have spent years defending a curriculum that leaves far too many Kiwi kids unable to read at their age level. If equality before the law, academic standards, and a return to core subjects now qualify as “anti Māori,” then the issue is not the Government’s policy it’s the worldview of the curriculum designers who think Māori children are somehow incapable of meeting the same expectations as everyone else. That is not partnership; that is patronisation.
Scrapping these vague, politically loaded requirements restores clarity: schools teach, boards govern schools, and the Treaty remains where it belongs guiding the Crown, not micromanaging Year 5 classrooms. Far from dismantling Māori identity, this frees up teachers to do what they do best educate without the constant pressure to perform symbolic politics.
In the end, this isn’t an attack on anyone. It’s a reset. A long overdue reminder that the purpose of the education system is to produce educated citizens, not cultural diplomats. And if the loudest critics believe that focusing on attendance, achievement, and literacy is somehow dangerous, then maybe they’re the ones who need to go back to school.
Steven is an entrepreneur and an ex RNZN diver who likes travelling, renovating houses, Swiss Watches, history, chocolate art and art deco.
6 comments:
It is a reset but what about the generation (or more) that has been impacted, how will they regain what they have missed out on? Also, Liebour will have it back in in a thrice!
We are a divided nation - those indoctrinated and protesting and those " saved just in time" who have a huge task ahead to try to maintain democracy.
This is Ardern' s pernicious legacy: a deeply divided NZ for many years to come.
Socialism through progressivism would have the state determining what school children are to be taught but traditional liberal education believes as a tenet that parents are to be the main educators of their children particularly in ideology. Even the UN states the rights of the child it mentions schools are to respect the beliefs of the parents. These groups forcing Maori culture and religious beliefs DEI , CRT and cancel culture on our children are violating human rights.
The fundamental belief of non socialists is that the parents , usually know best what is the most nurturing for their own precious children. Marxism believes the family is a bourgeois construct to be broken down. Parents are calling out for their children to be effectively taught the basics not indoctrinated into socialism or other ideologies. Progressive education has always had the subversive agenda of indoctrination but now it has become so obvious.
Quite right Steven, but those 'loudest critics' (if they're in education) need to find a new job. As Forrest Gump's mother reputedly said, 'stupid is - as stupid does' and people who harbour those kind of 'critical' thoughts ought not be within mile of our children - EVER!
Only 'one mile'? They should be at maximum distance from anywhere that is involved with education in this country
Agree with the viewpoints expressed in the article, as well as the commenters. Whatever one’s ideology, when a number of our children have been shown to produce sub-standard results as a result of the actions of the educational academics in charge, then we are witnessing a type of child abuse. I say “abuse” because the deterioration in established standards was deliberate. Damage that was consistent and widespread across our state schools could never have been an accident.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.