Is David Seymour planning on going back to the future with Kindergarten staff?

Strong rumours have it that David Seymour will be making a pretty devastating announcement about the staff of Kindergartens, possibly by the end of this week.  And it really will be history repeating itself.

David Seymour wants to take Kindergarten teachers out of the state sector.

This has happened before, on 29 April 1997, when then State Services Minister Jenny Shipley overnight introduced a Bill to remove Kindergarten Teachers from the state sector, passing it under Urgency (sound familiar?) the very next day, 30 April 1997.  Then Associate Minister of Education Brian Donnelly (NZ First) claimed they were removing an anomaly in ECE and that this move put Kindergartens on an even footing with other ECE providers.

But Kindergartens were never meant to be like the other ECE providers. Its sessional nature was not like the model of day care or parental play based ECE offered by other ECE providers.

In March 2000, legislation to return Kindergarten teachers to the state sector was introduced by then Education Minister Trevor Mallard, fulfilling a promise Labour made in 1997 when they were removed.  Mr Mallard said: 

“The previous Government saw early childhood education as a business. We see it as an integral part of the education system and we want to help as many children as possible have access to quality early childhood education.

“Teachers are the key to that quality. By taking responsibility for the terms under which they are employed, the Government is taking leadership for setting benchmarks for standards. We will be making advancements on issues like the provision and co-ordination of professional development.”

So why do we think that Mr Seymour, the current Associate Minister of Education with responsibility for Early Childhood Education, is preparing to announce removing Kindergarten teachers from the state sector yet again?

The Early Childhood Council.

The Early Childhood Council, who speak for the owners of ECE centres, has the ear of the Associate Minister of Education, David Seymour.  Apparently Simon Laube, the current CEO of the Early Childhood Council, worked in the Minister of Education’s office between October 2012 and August 2016, as a Principal Advisor for Partnership Schools Kura Hourua between November 2016 and September 2017 and as a Senior Manager for Partnership Schools between November 2017 and June 2019. At some point prior to the 2020 election, Mr Laube began working in David Seymour's office while ACT was in opposition.  We can surmise that Mr Laube and Minister Seymour have a working relationship.

The Early Childhood Council made a submission to the government’s review of regulations in ECE, specifically requesting that Kindergarten teachers be again removed from the State Sector Act.

However, before this submission was made, only 15% of the members, who are the people who own ECE centres, were consulted on the substance of the submission - so how does this represent the owners of ECE centres, let alone the workforce? 

The Kindergarten Association’s spokesperson Amanda Coulston released this press release, Early Childhood Submission a Cynical Attempt to Drive Down Standards, on the 16 of September.  These paragraphs stood out to me:

Kindergartens Aotearoa says private centres are trying to use the government’s review of regulations to drive down quality and reduce teachers’ pay so they can make greater profits from taxpayer funds.

The Early Childhood Council which represents mainly private centres has called for the government to scrap pay parity rules and reduce teacher-to-child ratio requirements.

The Council has also called for the kindergarten movement to be removed from the state sector. 

Kindergarten teachers have had pay parity with primary teachers for over 20 years, and that has been the mechanism for other early childhood teachers to achieve pay parity which the Council now wants to remove.

“Removing kindergarten teachers from the state sector will see the loss of the anchor that enables pay parity to be extended to the wider ECE sector” says KA spokesperson Amanda Coulston, “this is a cynical attempt to drive down standards and drive down quality. Research shows that our youngest and most vulnerable children actually need more qualified teachers and better ratios, not less. The ECC is putting profit before child wellbeing”. 

We know that Mr Seymour is taking his lead from Mr Laube because he has already implemented the call to scrap pay parity rules for ECE relief and fixed term teachers.  See this article from 4 September, Relief teachers cut from early childhood centre pay parity scheme:

The government has cut relief teachers from early childhood centre pay parity arrangements.

Early learning services that agree to pay their qualified teachers the same as kindergarten and school teachers qualify for a higher rate of government subsidy.

But from October, that commitment to pay parity would only apply to permanent staff, not relievers.

The government said the change would reduce administration costs.

Employer groups the Early Childhood Council and Te Rito Maioha Early Childhood New Zealand welcomed the change.

They said teachers had left permanent roles because they could earn more as relievers.

However, the Kindergarten Association and ECE relief teachers say this will cause the ECE teacher shortage to become a bigger problem.  In this article, Early childhood relief teachers face big drop in income, teachers said that they left full-time ECE teaching due to high workloads, poor conditions, workplace bullying and burnout, not because being a relief teacher was more lucrative, because being a relief teacher is NOT a lucrative income as your sick leave pay and holiday pay is included in your hourly rate.  Reducing their income was more likely to drive them out of even being an ECE reliever and certainly not back into the teaching space full-time.

Teacher Amy Dean said she left a permanent early childhood teaching job 18 months ago because she was burnt out by the stress of the work.

She told RNZ relieving worked well for her and had reignited her love of teaching, but now one of the companies that organised her relief placements wanted to cut her rate by $8 an hour because of the rule change announced last month.

"It's quite a lot of money. It's about $280 a week less if I take the $8 pay cut, if I work about 30-hours roughly," she said.

Dean said with the cost-of-living crisis, she did not know how she could justify losing that much income each week.

Centre owners hoped the change would prompt relievers to return to permanent roles, but Dean said working conditions in some centres were not good enough.

This change was made purely at the request of the Early Childhood Council, who represent ECE centre owners (but remember only 15% of ECE centre owners were consulted before this submission went in), and no teachers were consulted.

We also have David Seymour’s press release from 5 September where he made these interesting claims: 

“We have heard reports from centres around the country where teachers and carers are spending their time dealing with regulators and writing reports and plans on absurd things like the risk of apples falling from a tree in the playground, the first aid certificate being hung on the right-hand side of the doorframe instead of above it, or a train driver honking the train horn at the children as the train drives past every morning to the delight of the children but the chagrin of noise pollution police.”

Finally, during her address to the NZEI Te Riu Roa Hui-a-Tau on Wednesday 2 October, Stephanie Mills (the NZEI Te Riu Roa National Secretary) said that the Institute fully expected David Seymour would take Kindergarten staff out of the state sector very soon.

It was also very telling that during Minister of Education Erica Stanford's address to NZEI Te Riu Roa Hui-a-Tau attendees earlier on the same day, she did not mention the early childhood sector once. When questions were asked of her about the cuts to pay parity for ECE relief teachers, Erica was emphatic her only responsibilities in ECE were the curriculum and everything else was under David Seymour's Associate Minister of Education delegations.

So where does Labour stand on the possibility of the Kindergarten teachers being removed from the state sector?

Labour's Education spokesperson, Jan Tinetti, says Labour opposes removing Kindergarten teachers from the state sector. Pay parity between Kindergarten teachers and primary and secondary teachers is important to maintain qualifications, pay and conditions in Kindergartens, and by extension, the rest of the ECE sector. In recent years, Labour has worked with NZEI Te Riu Roa and centre owners to improve the pay of teachers in the private ECE settings and attempting to get pay equity with Kindergarten teachers. If Kindergarten teachers are removed from the state sector, this will allow the pay, conditions and even the qualification of teachers in the whole ECE sector to erode. Labour remains committed to pay equity in ECE as they believe a qualified, registered ECE teacher will provide the best start to a child's formal education journey.

After publishing this post I was able to make contact with the Green Party Education spokesperson, Lawrence Xu-Nan who said:

We strongly oppose any changes to the position of kindergartens within our public education system, and the harmful effects it will have for our tamariki, our kaiako, and their communities.
 

Kindergartens play a vital role in the education system of Aotearoa New Zealand. As part of the state sector, kindergartens have been a prime example of the kind of quality teaching and learning we can achieve in early childhood education. Part of this is because of the ownership model which removes the profit motive and means that educators can focus on children’s learning and wellbeing. Qualified and respected teachers with good working conditions are able to implement Te Whāriki, and can truly put the children at the centre of their work.

Considering David Seymour seems uninterested in listening to teachers themselves, has a huge disdain for the teacher unions and believes the Early Childhood Council speaks for all ECE teachers including Kindergarten teachers rather than NZEI Te Riu Roa or even the Kindergarten Association, we believe it is a fairly safe assumption he will announce taking Kindergarten teachers out of the state sector… a return to a failed near 30 year old policy.

 

References:

Note: These references have been included to provide background and demonstrate links between key personalities involved.

Kindergartens and their removal from the State Sector Act (1998): https://ojs.victoria.ac.nz/nzaroe/article/download/1161/966/1266#:~:text=But%20the%20new%20Bill%20was,and%20funding%20kindergarten%20teachers'%20salaries.

State Sector Act Removes Anomaly In Early Childhood 31 May 1997:

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/state-sector-act-removes-anomaly-early-childhood

Government Ownership of Kindergartens.13 March 2000:

https://oece.nz/public/big-issues/public-kindergarten/kindergarten-state-sector/

Simon Laube on LinkedIn, as at 2 October 2024:

https://www.linkedin.com/in/simon-laube-3aa23616/?originalSubdomain=nz

Early Childhood Submission a Cynical Attempt to Drive Down Standards, 16 September 2024:

https://wmkindergartens.org.nz/news/early-childhood-council-submission-a-cynical-attempt-to-drive-down-standards

Relief teachers cut from early childhood centre pay parity scheme, 4 September 2024:

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/527027/relief-teachers-cut-from-early-childhood-centre-pay-parity-scheme

Early childhood relief teachers face big drop in income, 1 October 2024:

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/529501/early-childhood-relief-teachers-face-big-drop-in-income

Ministry for Regulation kicks off first sector review – Early Childhood Education, 5 June 2024:

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/ministry-regulation-kicks-first-sector-review-%E2%80%93-early-childhood-education

New Education Minister starts her 100 Day Plan

On Tuesday the new Minister of Education, Erica Stanford, released her

First steps of 100 day for education: removing distractions and teaching the basics brilliantly press release.  Naturally every new government loves to stamp their mark on the education sector very early on.  And this does.

One hour a day....

First up, Minister Stanford states:

“We have an aspirational target to get 80 per cent of our kids to curriculum by the time they finish intermediate, to set them up for success so they can live the life they want.

“Starting from Term 1 2024, all students in Years 0 – 8 will be taught reading, writing and maths for an average of one hour a day in each subject.

“We’re seeing that many schools are already doing this well, but this change is about having time dedicated to teaching reading, writing and maths in a purposeful and deliberate way consistently across New Zealand.

“The Ministry of Education will provide guidance and support to assist schools with the implementation of these changes.”

This has been communicated by the MOE in the School Leaders Bulletin Issue 169 sent out on December 12th.  The MOE stated:

Improving outcomes in reading, writing, and maths (or pānui, tuhituhi and pāngarau) is a priority for the Government. The Government will ask schools with students Years 0 to 8 to spend an average of an hour a day teaching reading, writing, and maths (or pānui, tuhituhi and pāngarau).

We know many of you are already doing this teaching, so there may not be a big change for you. 

This policy will safeguard explicit teaching time for reading, writing and maths (or pānui, tuhituhi and pāngarau). The expectation is that, on average, schools will be doing five hours a week of maths (pāngarau) and 10 hours a week of reading and writing (pānui and tuhituhi). 

There are some issues I can see with this, but that is for another post.  

Come again!  What is this?

But this, further down in the Minister's press release raised my hackles:

Kura with students in Years 0 – 8, run by a specified kura board, will have until Term 3 2024 for implementation of the requirement for one hour a day of each of reading, writing and maths, to enable consultation.

Specialist schools will have an extended 12 month deadline until Term 1 2025 to ensure the requirement for one hour a day of each of reading, writing and maths best supports teaching and learning for their students.

Specialist schools?  Are we talking about the schools that cater for students who have ORS funding because they have extra special learning needs?  I had flashbacks to when I was required to do National Standards OTJs in reading, writing and maths for a Year 6 child with Downs Syndrome who was not even accessing Level 1 of the New Zealand Curriculum.

The cell phone ban.  🙄

Then there is the policy for no student cell phones in schools - which I consider most schools can already make this decision effectively for themselves and completely ignores that for many students this is the only device they can access for learning.  Here is what Erica Stanford wrote.

“New Zealand schools and overseas jurisdictions that have already imposed restrictions on cellphones in the classroom have reported better concentration and engagement in class, and an improvement in student achievement and wellbeing.

“Effective from Term 2 2024, students will need to put their cellphone away for the day and schools will be required to have a cellphone policy in place by then.

“While the policy officially takes effect from Term 2 2024, it is our expectation that most schools will implement the policy from Term 1.

“The implementation and enforcement of the policy will be at the discretion of individual schools to ensure it is implemented effectively for their school community. Options that have been successfully used in some schools include having students hand in their cellphones before class or leaving them in their lockers or bags for the day. Exemptions will be allowed for students with health conditions or in special learning circumstances."

I am glad there will be an exemption for students with health conditions.  I spend a bit of time in classes in my local intermediate school.  All students are required to hand in their phones at the beginning of the school day.  The only students who are exempt have diabetes and the phone monitors their blood sugar and need for insulin through a very expensive special patch on their arm that eliminates the need to use other more traditional measures.

The School Leaders Bulletin said:

Both international and local evidence shows that cellphones can be a distraction from learning during class time, as well as reducing important face to face interaction during school breaks. A UNESCO report published in July describes the move towards cellphones being away for the school day as supporting addressing issues of classroom disruption, improving learning and helping protect children from cyberbullying. 

Smartphones in school? Only when they clearly support learning – UNESCO 26 July 2023

The expectation of our new coalition Government is that you are ready to implement a cellphone policy that has cellphones ‘away for the day’ as soon as possible in Term 1 2024.

You can find examples of how some schools have managed implementing this policy here: 

Phones away for the day – Ministry of Education 

From now until the beginning of Term 1 2024, we will be providing examples of policy practice that you may choose to consult on and adapt for your community. These will be added to the web page.

The Government’s intention is to have the regulations for this policy in place before Christmas. For those schools that have an existing cellphone policy in place there may be very little to do. Others will need to begin the process of implementing a new cellphone policy in their school community. We will provide a small number of implementation examples to support the process of policy design and implementation. 

Subject to the regulations being in place, there will be some flexibility in how you implement the policy based on your circumstances and the needs of learners and their families. For example, an exemption could be agreed where a student requires a phone to support their health or learning needs.

The Ministerial Advisory Group is announced.

But the next part concerns me the most.  And that is the announcement of who would be on the Ministerial Advisory Group to review the primary school English, maths and statistics curricula.  Ms Stanford said of this group:

“The intention for the review of the English and maths curricula is not to start again, but to build on the work that has already been done and strengthen this,” says Erica Stanford.

“The aim is to ensure teachers have the clarity and tools needed to teach these core subjects brilliantly. Work will be done in the first half of 2024, ready for implementation in 2025.

“We will make sure schools are teaching the basics brilliantly, so every child has the opportunity to succeed – in school and beyond.”

This echoes what was said in the School Leaders Bulletin.

But what does concern me is who is on the group, their links to other organisations and how many of them, if not all, were critical of the direction of the previous government's education policies and direction.

Dr Michael Johnston (Chair)   

Michael is a cognitive psychologist with experience in a variety of roles across the education sector. He is currently a Senior Fellow at the New Zealand Initiative where he leads the workstream on education. Michael has held academic positions at the University of Melbourne and Victoria University of Wellington, where he was Associate Dean (Academic) in the Faculty of Education. He has published research on human cognition, literacy acquisition and educational assessment. Prior to his time at Victoria, Michael was the Senior Statistician at the New Zealand Qualifications Authority, where he developed technical processes for NCEA, including the grade score marking system for external examinations. He contributed to Ministry of Education policy work for the NCEA literacy and numeracy co-requisites and designed the framework for the Progress and Consistency assessment tool. He is a current member of NZQA’s Technical Overview Group on Assessment.

So my concerns are as follows:

• is part of the New Zealand Initiative, a right wing think tank which is no fan of a free quality public education system.
• is not actually a teacher - he is a statistician - so has no idea about how teaching is done in primary.
• it says he contributed to MOE policy work for NCEA - but this Advisory group is focused on the primary curriculum.

Dr. Audrey Tan   

Audrey is a mathematics educator with more than 20 years' experience helping primary and secondary school students to achieve significantly improved outcomes.  With a deep belief that everyone can learn maths, Audrey has, for many years, advocated a more pragmatic approach to teaching maths in primary schools.  Her professional learning and development for educators in a school setting focuses on effective teaching practices that are supported by the cognitive science of learning to raise both teacher confidence and student achievement. Audrey holds a B.Sc. Honours degree in Mathematics from the University of Canterbury and a Ph.D. in Pure Mathematics from the University of Cambridge.  She was a member of the NCEA Numeracy Subject Expert Group and has contributed to the New Zealand curriculum refresh as a Subject Matter Expert.

My concerns with this choice:

• Dr Tan has often been in the media over the last few years publicly denigrating our New Zealand Mathematics and Statistics Curriculum and how it is taught, but to be fair, she did so under the previous National led government too.

Barbara Ala’alatoa  

Barbara is a New Zealand Curriculum (NZC) refresh Coherence Group member for the New Zealand curriculum refresh project. She is the former Principal of Sylvia Park School and is currently an Education Consultant. Prior to this, she worked as a lecturer and senior lecturer at Auckland College of Education and as a primary school teacher. She has also chaired the National Ministerial Leadership and Teaching Quality Workstream and been a member of the National Workforce Policy Advisory Group and National Curriculum Advisory Group which had a real focus on progress and achievement and building leader and teacher capability. She has chaired the Boards of Te Kura (2019 to 2022) and Education Council of Aotearoa New Zealand (2015 to 2019) and was on the Independent Taskforce on the Review of Tomorrow’s Schools. Her current role is chair of Ako Mātātupu Teach First NZ.

I'll just refresh your memory of Ms Ala'alatoa:

• Hekia Parata's university flatmate.
• Ms Ala'alatoa was the principal at Sylvia Park School the day former PM John Key asked Hekia Parata to ring around to find out about kids going to school without lunch.
• she was the founding Chair of EDUCANZ, which was controversially set up in opposition to 99% of submission, so has a history of being appointed by National Education Ministers to organisations.

Dr Christine Braid   

Christine is a facilitator at the Institute of Education, Massey University with expertise in junior reading. She contributed to the New Zealand curriculum refresh specifically on literacy and is currently leading the Literacy@Massey training programme, where she works with teachers across New Zealand to ensure they have the knowledge and skills to significantly improve children’s literacy outcomes. She has a background as a primary school teacher and literacy facilitator, and more recently as an educational researcher in the area of literacy. She was part of the Massey University Early Literacy Research Project and lead facilitator on the Ministry of Education contract for teacher training in TEPiL.

I know one of Dr Christine Braid's extended family members, and she assures me that Christine is a top person who upholds the rights of all rangatahi and has spent years doing substantial research regarding how teachers influence reading outcomes for beginning readers.  Another friend of mine has received some solid PLD from Dr Braid.  However, she has been published by the New Zealand Institute too, which gives me concern, but her relative informs me that does not mean Dr Braid is aligned with them.

Professor Elizabeth Rata  

Professor Elizabeth Rata is a sociologist of education in the School of Critical Studies, Faculty of Education and Social Work at the University of Auckland. She is Director of the Knowledge in Education Research Unit (KERU) and leads the Knowledge Rich School Project which focuses on national curriculum design.

Professor Rata is somewhat controversial.  It was a post on BlueSky by Morgan Godfrey that first alerted me to this appointment and the fact this Ministerial Advisory Group was announced.  Prof Rata was very involved in the early set up of kura kaupapa, but has since been described as the female Don Brash when it comes to things Māori - and I am being very polite with that description.  She does have associations with Hobson's Pledge, the New Zealand Initiative and is one of the Listener Seven.  It is amazing what a Google search finds.  I also heard she believes the curriculum should be ten pieces of knowledge.  A few people reached out to me over her, and they had nothing complimentary to say, so I won't repeat it.  I'm really perplexed as to why Prof Rata was appointed.

 

Associate Professor Fiona Ell   

Fiona is an Associate Professor in School of Curriculum Pedagogy, University of Auckland. She is a Lead subject matter expert for the Mathematics and Statistics writing team for the New Zealand curriculum refresh. Fiona was a member of the Royal Society Expert Panel on Mathematics Education from January to July 2021. She undertakes research in the area of mathematics education and prepares teachers to teach primary level mathematics and statistics.

Associate Professor Ell is also a member of the Governing Council of the Teaching Council of Aotearoa New Zealand as the Teacher Educatior's Representative.  Along with Distinguished Professor Gaven Martin (see below), Associate Professor Ell has been a member of the Royal Society Te Apārangi Expert Advisory Panel on Mathematics and Statistics convened between January and June 2021 with a brief to provide advice to the Ministry of Education on the English-medium Mathematics and Statistics curriculum in Aotearoa New Zealand and I think it makes sense to have someone who has done this work be part of this Advisory Group.

Distinguished Professor Gaven Martin   

Gaven is a Distinguished Professor of Mathematics at Massey University, and Chair of the New Zealand Mathematical Research Institute. He is the former head of the New Zealand Institute for Advanced Study and chaired the Royal Society Te Apārangi Royal Society Panel 2021 providing advice to the Ministry of Education on refreshing the mathematics and statistics learning area of the New Zealand Curriculum. The Royal Society’s report was titled "Pāngarau Mathematics and Tauanga Statistics in Aotearoa New Zealand".

Distinguished Professor Gaven Martin was involved with the Expert Advisory panel in 2021.  He has spoken out in the media over the years for improvements in maths teaching.

Dr Helen Walls   

Helen is a professional learning facilitator and researcher specialising in the teaching of writing, structured literacy, school-wide data analysis, formative assessment and feedback. She has 20 years’ experience working in schools. Helen assists schools to plan effective programmes which are closely aligned with student needs. She is passionate about supporting teachers, sharing evidence-based methods that will engage with every student.

Dr Walls has worked with Dr Braid.  She is a teacher, professional learning facilitator and an educational researcher with an expertise in writing, known on Facebook as The Writing Teacher.

Iain Taylor   

Iain is an experienced Principal and educational leader. For the last 15 years he has led Manurewa Intermediate School as Principal. In this role he has worked to improve student attendance and achievement and was recognised for his service in 2017 as recipient of the Prime Minister’s Supreme Educational Excellence Award. Outside the classroom, Iain has led the New Zealand Principals’ Federation as their president and worked on the ERO Advisory Board.

This is a bit of a mixed bag.

• as the NZPF president, Iain Taylor condemned the Charter School model.
• he was one of the principals/schools rung by Hekia Parata to ask about kids having lunch or not on that infamous day, like Barbara Ala'alatoa.  (I think the other school in Ruatoria had a family connection to Ms Parata).
• he was inclined towards National Standards.
• he has hosted new PM Christopher Mark Luxon at least twice - Luxon visited Manurewa Intermediate a year ago and more recently with Minister Stanford.

In this second video, Iain Taylor is a bit dubious about Minister Stanford's goal to have 80% of Year 8 students "at curriculum" as they leave their intermediate years.  

As an aside, "at curriculum" is not a term we use in education the way Ms Stanford uses it and it really annoys me that she uses it.

Professor James Chapman   

James is an Emeritus Professor of Educational Psychology in the College of Humanities and Social Sciences at Massey University.  His research interests include literacy learning difficulties, cognitive-motivational factors associated with low achievement, and learning disabilities Reading Recovery. James is an experienced researcher and university teacher based at Massey University. As well as having over 150 publications in peer-reviewed journals and books on learning disabilities, literacy learning issues, dyslexia/literacy difficulties, and cognitive motivation factors in learning and achievement, James has been an advisor for the University of Canterbury Better Start Literacy Approach research and was a member of the Ministry of Education Literacy Experts Group.

Prof James Chapman is a big fan of structured literacy, and not so much of Marie Clay and Reading Recovery.  But, hey, research moves on.

Lorraine Taylor   

Lorraine is an experienced Primary School Principal and mentor /coach for other principals. She is currently the principal of Silverstream School Upper Hutt after serving in principal roles in three Rotorua primary schools. Lorraine has been involved in Ministry of Education work for a number of years, notably in the development and testing for the Progress and Consistency Tool (PaCT).

Lorraine Taylor is an unknown element to me.  But the fact she is an advocate for the development of PaCT gives me a moment to pause, especially since National's last Minister of Education had planned to elevate PaCT and make it compulsory as part of their 2017 education manifesto.

Dr. Melissa Derby   

Melissa is a Senior Lecturer teaching early literacy and human development at the University of Waikato. She is the co-Director of the Early Years Research Centre, hosted by the Wilf Malcolm Institute of Educational Research at the University of Waikato. Melissa completed her PhD in Education at the University of Canterbury, and her project was a part of A Better Start National Science Challenge. Her primary area of research is in early literacy, in particular exploring the role of whānau in fostering foundational literacy skills.

Dr Derby seems to be the only Māori voice on this panel, however, I was somewhat concerned when I google Dr Derby to see:

• she has been interviewed several times by Reality Check Radio (home of the anti-vaxxers, conspiracy theorist, the Hobson Pledgers and so much more).
• she is a governing member of the Free Speech Union.
• she may be a Posie Parker supporter and is highly likely to be anti-trans. *
• she appears to be a person who does not think socio-economic or cultural deprivation impacts educational achievement.

But I'll let you form your own judgement from these videos Dr Derby has done for the Common Room NZ, which is, as described by The Spinoff, a right wing media organisation focused on unpacking the big ideas.

I think these videos clearly illustrate Dr Derby's values and beliefs.  While thought provoking and presented in a very reasonable manner, I was still speechless that she said what she said.

Final thoughts...

So some members of the Ministerial Advisory Group raise more concerns than others.  I am concerned there is no truly strong Māori voices and that there is not one Pasifika voice in this group.  I am concerned that there is a strong element of the New Zealand Initiative and possibly more National/ACT aligned members of this Advisory Group.

It remains to see what they will recommend.  The ink is barely dry on the Curriculum Refresh and school leadership and teaching teams are still getting their heads around it... so of course, like when the New Zealand Curriculum was about to bed in in 2009, National is upsetting the apple cart completely.

* This is not included to encourage people to dox anyone - I highly disapprove of doxxing.  In fact, it is to inform that this is found by a simple Google search which brought up Dr Derby's X post "likes" and who she has supported in her role at the Free Speech Union.

Silence in the face of injustice is complicity with the oppressor.

The ink is not yet dry on the near three week old coalition agreement between the National, ACT and New Zealand First, yet this new government has been beset with protest action across the country.  On the day Parliament resumed, Tuesday 5 December, and all the MPs would be sworn in, iwi with support from Te Pāti Māori, had mobilised thousands of New Zealanders to protest in many towns and cities across the motu.

What was the new Prime Minister Christoper Mark Luxon's response?

"I think it's pretty unfair to be honest, I think the reality is we're in government for a week, we are going to get things going - and for Māori and for non-Māori - and that's what our focus is going to be."

Yet when one looks at the new coalition government's coalition agreement, it appears to be a laundry list of taking things away from Māori as well as repealing everything the former Labour government put in place - including legislation passed when New Zealand First was in coalition with Labour between 2017 and 2020.

So what in the coalition agreement sparked this protest?

• the Māori Health Authority to be abolished.
• co-governance to be removed from the delivery of public services.
• government agency names will be required to be primarily in English.
• a Treaty Principles Bill, based on existing ACT policy, to be introduced.
• rewriting existing legislation to make mentions of the principles of the Treaty more specific.

And that is just the tip of the ice berg.

To boot, it emerged on Wednesday the Minister of Finance, Nicola Willis, was seeking advice on how to disestablish bonuses (which are actually negotiated allowances in Individual and Collective Agreements) for public servants who are proficient in te reo Māori.  These public servant provide something extra to their agency colleagues may not be able to provide, which is why they receive the allowance - so it really does look like a blatant attack on te reo speakers by the new government when they say such things.

On that Tuesday, ACT party leader (and Deputy Prime Minister in waiting for 18 months) David Seymour claimed that the protest focus was unclear, which demonstrated Mr Seymour truly can not read the room, because there was a clear message from the protest:

"This national protest is in direct response to the government changes that seek to rapidly dismantle three generations worth of work under an agenda that blatantly disregards the place of Māori in Aotearoa and looks to marginalise us as Tangata Whenua," the pānui said.

It was not just Māori New Zealanders who attended the protests on that Tuesday.  A cross section of New Zealand society who value Te Tiriti o Waitangi and te reo Māori also joined those protests on Tuesday 5 December.  I even heard an RNZ reporter say they had met someone visiting from Ireland who came to the protest out at Hobsonville in West Auckland to tautoko the kaupapa.

This week there have also been protests against the repealing of the Smokefree Act and the Fair Pay Agreements Act, as well as two large marches on Sunday calling for the government to call for a ceasefire in Gaza.

And this brings me to why I have called this post "Silence in the face of injustice is complicity with the oppressor".

I have not made a post for nearly three years.  Have I always been happy in the last three years with events or government actions?  Hell no, and I supported the previous government.  However, I did not feel the absolute disgust and abhorrence I feel towards the actions of this new government.  I can not "give them a chance" because I can see they are undoing everything that evidence shows we need.  

So I can not be silent in the face of injustice.  I will not be complicit with the oppressor.

This quote, "The oppressor would not be so strong if he did not have accomplices among the oppressed" also speaks to me because I see Māori in the new government become complicit, being accomplices to the detriment of all Māori.

Dr Shane Reti, a medical doctor, a GP, the new Minister of Health, is complicit in his silence over the repeal of the Smokefree Act, considering the huge percentage of Māori, especially in Northland, who smoke and the opposition of his fellow health professionals to repealing the Smokefree Act.  He has earned the moniker of Dr Ciggareti.  Dr Reti will be an accomplice in the demolition ot the Māori Health Authority - explicitly set up to redress the fact that Māori are not on the right side of any health statistic.

Tama Potaka, the new Minister for Māori Crown Relations, Māori Development, Whānau Ora and for Conservation as well as Associate Minister for Housing with Social Housing being his delegation, is also complicit in his silence against the diminishment of te reo Māori by this new government, the attacks on Te Tiriti o Waitangi, disposal of co-governance, and more. 

Matua Winston Peters and Shane Jones have not covered themselves in glory at all during Question Time since the House resumed.

There are other Māori members of the government scattered through ACT and New Zealand First.  New Associate Health Minister Casey Costello is a founding member of the group Hobson's Pledge who oppose pretty much everything Māori and part of the Tax Payers Union (not a union) who are sponsored by British American Tabacco.  None of them are standing up against these measures.  They too are complicit.  They too are accomplices.

A former MP recently posted on X (formerly known as Twitter): Two of these words wasn't used today Kaupapa, Kukupa and Kupapa. #Reo  My response was there are a few kupapa within this government.  To be a kupapa is to be complicit, to be an accomplice.

This quote, "When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression" explains the new government.

Back when Pākehā first came to New Zealand, the Māori were the owners of the land, the economic powerhouse, the most educated.  But then colonialism happened, pushing Māori of their land, destroying their economic base, pushing them to the land that was not so prosperous and healthy, forcing urbanisation alongside punishing children who used te reo and alienating generations of Māori from their hāpu and marae.

Fifty-one years ago, on September 14 1972, a group of Māori stood on the steps of Parliament to reclaim their right to te reo Māori.  The land march by the great Dame Whina Cooper followed in 1975, the establishment of the Waitangi Tribunal, then Bastian Point.  Kohanga Reo and Kura Kaupapa were established by iwi.  Te reo Māori was made an offical language of New Zealand in 1987.  The first Treaty settlement happened with Tainui in 1992.  And so much more has happened since then to advance the growth of te reo Māori and address breaches to Te Tiriti o Waitangi and more.

But all these advances threaten some sectors of society.  It threatens those who currently hold the land, who currently have the economic power.  In 2023 they spoke with their cheque books and funded the National, ACT and New Zealand First parties, as well as the astroturf groups associated with the Tax Payers Union (not an actual union).  And enough New Zealanders believed and voted.

Now we are stuck with the Circus Coalition and the three clowns at the top.

Christopher Mark Luxon* claims he will unite New Zealand.  But the ink is not even dry on his coalition deal, it hasn't quite been three weeks and protestors are not willing to be complicit with his government's oppression.

References:

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/503955/prime-minister-christopher-luxon-says-maori-protests-against-government-pretty-unfair

https://newsroom.co.nz/2023/11/24/luxon-coalition-national-act-nz-first-peters/

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/504003/te-reo-maori-govt-seeks-to-halt-extra-pay-for-public-servants-fluent-in-the-language

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/te-manu-korihi/503892/te-pati-maori-calls-for-nationwide-protest-against-government-s-co-governance-policies#:~:text=%22This%20national%20protest%20is%20in,Whenua%2C%22%20the%20p%C4%81nui%20said.

https://newsroom.co.nz/2023/11/14/the-nz-first-mp-picked-for-a-big-future/

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/in-depth/496933/astroturf-accusations-over-we-belong-website-run-by-anti-co-governance-group

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/439960/ex-act-staffer-grant-mclachlan-says-party-created-fake-grassroots-groups

Notes:

* I will be using Christopher Mark Luxon's full name because he is a naughty child in my eyes.

I am back and I have more to say.