Newsroom has delved into a Waitangi Tribunal report for details of the policy-shaping process which resulted in school boards being relieved of their statutory obligation to give effect to the Treaty of Waitangi.
As Newsroom tells it, the Ministry of Education warned the decision to remove the obligation would lead to a Waitangi Tribunal claim.
Officials did not have to be too prescient to predict that, of course. Whatever the Luxon Government did to change things would result in a claim to the Waitangi Tribunal if there was a whiff of Maori leaders being inadequately consulted or losing some privileges.
Official advice was ignored and the Waitangi Tribunal went to work, producing a series of three reports.
The last of these – published last week – addressed the removal of section 127(1)(d) of the legislation that was amended, dealing the school boards’ obligation to give effect to the treaty.
Newsroom reports:
The report found the Crown breached the Treaty, partly to do with the removal of the school boards’ Treaty obligation itself, but also to do with a process in which the Crown did not consult Māori.
Ultimately, the Waitangi Tribunal recommended reinstating the clause in its entirety and for the Crown to apologise to Māori – the first time it has called for an apology across the three reports.
The Newsroom report aims to enlighten readers about the process the Luxon Government followed, but along the way it has illuminated how mentioning the Treaty to government policy-makers can effect change.
Correction: not the Treaty, but the “Treaty Principles” which have been concocted and modified only in the past few decades.
And here’s how invoking them is translated into legislation:
Official advice was ignored and the Waitangi Tribunal went to work, producing a series of three reports.
The last of these – published last week – addressed the removal of section 127(1)(d) of the legislation that was amended, dealing the school boards’ obligation to give effect to the treaty.
Newsroom reports:
The report found the Crown breached the Treaty, partly to do with the removal of the school boards’ Treaty obligation itself, but also to do with a process in which the Crown did not consult Māori.
Ultimately, the Waitangi Tribunal recommended reinstating the clause in its entirety and for the Crown to apologise to Māori – the first time it has called for an apology across the three reports.
The Newsroom report aims to enlighten readers about the process the Luxon Government followed, but along the way it has illuminated how mentioning the Treaty to government policy-makers can effect change.
Correction: not the Treaty, but the “Treaty Principles” which have been concocted and modified only in the past few decades.
And here’s how invoking them is translated into legislation:
- In 2017, a Treaty obligation for school boards was introduced by the then National-led government.
It built on an earlier requirement on school boards to recognise Māori culture and stated that a board must take all reasonable steps to ensure that the policies and practices for its school reflect New Zealand’s cultural diversity and the unique position of Māori culture; to take all reasonable steps to act in a manner that is consistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi; and to take all reasonable steps to provide instruction in tikanga Māori and te reo Māori for full-time students whose parents ask for it.
Is that the thin edge of a wedge?
Yep.
- In 2020, under a new Labour government, further changes were introduced with the intention to strengthen the Crown’s obligations to the treaty in the education system.
That government repealed the Education Act 1989, replacing it with the Education and Training Act 2020 and introducing section 127.
The new law mandated school boards to give effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, including by working to ensure that their plans, policies, and local curriculum reflect local tikanga Māori, mātauranga Māori, and te ao Māori ; taking all reasonable steps to make instruction available in tikanga Māori and te reo Māori ; and achieving equitable outcomes for Māori students.
The new obligations recognised that te reo Māori , tikanga, mātauranga Māori, and te ao Māori were taonga, which the Crown had a duty to actively protect – Māori tino rangatiratanga rights, the tribunal said in its report.
Would educational outcomes be lifted by the effects of these Treaty influences being incorporated in school teachings?
Of course they would. The Waitangi Tribunal says so:
The tribunal highlighted it was well documented that education outcomes improved when a student’s culture, identity, and language were incorporated into education, as well as when whānau had a role in decision-making.
But wait.
Without the Treaty of Waitangi to underpin their performance, what happens to Asian students?
We ask because they achieve the highest academic pass rates and qualification outcomes of any major ethnic group in New Zealand schools.
Data from the New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA) and Education Counts consistently shows they lead across senior secondary qualifications, university readiness, and foundational literacy and numeracy assessments.
Click to view
Asian school leavers outperform all other ethnic cohorts in completing national qualifications and meeting university admission standards.
Check out the Ministry of Education data in the table above: 91.9% of Asian school leavers achieved NCEA Level 1 or higher, ahead of European/Pākehā (86.1%), Pacific Peoples (81.4%), and Māori (72.3%).
The Waitangi Tribunal perhaps should have examined the influence of culture, identity and language on the school achievements of those students before writing its report.
Bob Edlin is a veteran journalist and editor for the Point of Order blog HERE.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.