Labour Leadership - Here We Go Again...

Labour, the other Saturday, plunged to its lowest place in the polls in its nearly 100 year history.  Some polls had warned that Labour was slipping in the polls in the weeks leading up to the election, but internal polling had indicated higher numbers, and the door knocking and phone calling had also indicated positive responses to people supporting and voting Labour. 

 

Combined with National slipping bit by bit in the polls following the Dirty Politics book release and Judith Collins' inappropriate behaviour being fully exposed, how buoyant the Greens had been in the polls and the fact that New Zealand First's policies and people seemed to lean more towards the left than the right, I was confident that the election would be on a knife edge.  I honestly thought a clear winning team would not be evident on the night.

 

Oh how wrong I was, and many others.

 

With National winning 41 electorate seats and 48% of the party vote to get an extra 20 List MPs, it meant they had 61 MPs out of 120.  John Key also moved in the next few days to make doubly sure he had the House in his grasp by opening discussions with his "friends" from the last six years: the Mäori Party, United Future and ACT (who shouldn't be there - but that is another discussion).

 

 

Meanwhile, predictably, Labour was tearing itself apart.  Just like in November 2011, the leader was blamed.  David Cunliffe was vilified for his speech at the end of election night (the one where he celebrated the work of all the party volunteers and supporters - and right that he did, because we worked bloody hard) and his lack of resignation on the spot.  As someone pointed out on Twitter recently, did Helen Clark's election night resignation set the benchmark for the losing leader?

 

 

In the days that followed, Cunliffe was continually criticised for his blaming Kim Dotcom for the failure of the left to thrive, for blaming the Dirty Politics book for sucking up tv air time, for not taking responsibility for his role in Labour plunging to a new low, for not resigning, for gagging his MPs....

 

Then there was the various Labour MPs speaking to the media about why they thought Labour had gone down in the polls and what they think should happen next.  Followed by the 7.5 hour horror caucus meeting on Tuesday and the angst and hair pulling since then, the membership of Labour became even more concerned and, just like within the caucus, people have started aligning themselves with their preferred leader, including several Facebook pages that support David Cunliffe in continuing his leadership of Labour.

 

 

 

And then there were the bloggers, journalists and media commentators who weighed in with accurate comments and the crazy off the mark comments too.

 

 

 

On Saturday, David Cunliffe resigned his leadership, taking responsibility for the election loss, and then nominated himself for the leadership vote.  Grant Robertson also put his name back into the hat.  David Shearer had indicated that early last week that he was considering a bid, but as he has been in New York at the UN with Murray McCully the last few days, this has yet to materialise at the time of writing this blog. 

 

 

 

Other names that have been thrown about include Kelvin Davis (who ruled himself out - including to me in a tweet), Jacinda Ardern and Andrew Little (who are playing that coolly, particularly as Little has to wait for the confirmed election results on October 4th to know he really is the 5th list MP for Labour) and, strangely, Stuart Nash (who, while he has run a great campaign to win Napier back, was helped by the fact that Garth McVicar split the vote on the right when he ran for the Conservatives and a new National candidate).

 

 

I note that the commentators and journalists have not aimed similar vitriol at the Greens or NZ First for their performance on Election Day.  Neither of those parties reached their predicted percentage of the votes, in fact the Greens have one less MP than they had in the last parliament.  And I'm not the only one to notice....

 

 

After David Cunliffe announced his intentions on Saturday, Sue Moroney posted this on Facebook:

 

 

I had been wondering Sue's point of view since Tuesday's caucus meeting where she resigned as Chief Whip (which she explained in another post she had done so to concentrate on her portfolio areas).  Consequently I was very pleased to see the above post.  I believe that people become MPs because, apart from their desire to enter politics and serve the country, it is the people behind them, the party members, who do the hard yakka to get that MP into parliament. If you do not recognise those who help you and feed back to them then the relationships you develop during the campaign will not exist for the following campaign.

 

Below is my response to Sue on Facebook:

 

I personally think that DC will have learnt a lot over the last year and that experience of learning on the job is irreplaceable.

It took Helen Clark & co 6 years to win the Treasury Benches after she became leader and she had some big hurdles and an election loss. It took her time to build her relationships as leader and with NZ.

This stuff doesn't happen overnight.

One of the reasons I joined Labour was the ability of the membership to have a say in who leads the party. So I'm pleased that DC and Grant are honouring the process set down by the party rules.

But after that process is over, the factions need to dissolve and the backstabbing needs to end. And not just in caucus.  I've been appalled to see it in the organisation/backroom side of the party too. And what is worse is that it is incredibly obvious, so obvious that people like Patrick Gower and Mike Hosking and Duncan Garner and Paul Henry have had a feeding frenzy on it.

The caustic culture of factions and backstabbing throughout the party must cease. That's why we lost.

 

I then re-posted this to my own Facebook status, because I am tired of the factions destabilising Labour and undermining the hard work put in by the party members and supporters.

 

In August last year I wrote a post called Leadership.... a tale of two leaders: Helen Clark & David Shearer.  In that post I wrote the following:

 

Whoever does have the X-Factor to win the race to being the Labour leader will need to have and do the following in my opinion:

• unite the party - Labour doesn't need to be squabbling amongst themselves for the next year; we need them to show that they can beat John Key and National at their own game.
• be able to do a sound bite with confidence for the 6 o'clock news - it's all about looks in this game.
• be a good debater in the house - put John Key, Steven Joyce, Judith Collins and the rest back in their box please!!
• keep your friends close and your enemies closer - keep your enemies very busy in key jobs so they don't have time to mischief make.  It worked for Helen Clark, and maybe that's why Steven Joyce has so many ministerial responsibilities (just throwing that out there in case JK and Joyce aren't as close as everyone says).
• keep close tabs on what everyone is doing - Helen did, that way she minimised surprises and everyone kept on top of things.
• put out good policy (especially dumping National Standards and getting rid of Charter Schools) and back it throughout the party - you need to show that you can be the next government.
• connect to the New Zealand public at many levels - get out there and meet the people and be involved in as many events as possible.  Shearer did do this, but it has to also mesh with how people see you on the tv fronting issues.
• everytime National does something dumb, use it - honestly, National has had some right regular stuff ups in the last year, but no hay has been made while the sun shines for Labour when these stuff ups happen.  You should be all over those stuff ups like shit on a blanket (to be blunt).
• watch that doco about Helen and learn from her example of how to stick to it, unite the party, and get the public onside.  Pay particular attention to the part about when there was almost a coup against her before the 1999 election.
• meet the standard of being a leader - we need you to do your job because this is a democracy.

Now I believe that David Cunliffe did some of the above (did he read my blog per chance?) such as doing some great sound bites for the 6 o'çlock news, keeping his enemies close (he kept all the leading stirrers in his top 10), getting manygreat policies out there (especially in education, health, housing and the economy), there was better targeting of National stuff ups and some stern debate in the House by David and others (some delegated to various members of caucus, like Hipkins going after Parata and Robertson on Collins), David and been very visible in the public eye at many events of great variety in the last year.... and I saw David take command in the pre-election debates with John Key.

Yes, there were some stuff ups to, like the anonymous donations to a trust and not being able to fully articulate the Capital Gains Tax details (have you seen the Labour 2014 manifesto?  It's so big!), but that is part of learning.  John Key has many brain fades and "forgets" far too many things to make me comfortable at the end of the day, yet his caucus is NOT publicly mauling him for his failings, and the media is so busy focused on David's minor stuff ups they are not taking Key to task on his stuff ups.

Then there were the media beat ups like the letter David Cunliffe wrote for Donghua Liu in 2003 (do you remember every letter/correspondence you wrote in 2003?), the "apology" at the Women's Refuge symposium (at which Paula Bennett spent the whole time others were speaking playing on her phone) and various other minor incidents during which the media called for Cunliffe to resign.

Which other leader of a political party has had so many media commentators calling on them to resign in one year?  When you think about all the stuff ups John Key has made and have so far been revealed, why isn't he on a permanent holiday in Hawaii right now?

Quite frankly, who would want to be the leader of the Labour party right now knowing that you would be constantly harassed and vilified by the New Zealand media on a daily basis?

And why is this happening?  Well it is obvious that some MPs have not been loyal, and I have to conclude that some party members at various levels and possibly some staffers have also not been loyal.

I said above from my post last year that the new leader would have to unite the party and stop the squabbling.  Well clearly that was one area in which David Cunliffe has not made much progress.  But I believe he can not shoulder all the blame.  The party president, Moira Coatsworth, and the Labour Council should be held responsible for this as well.  They have the ability to censure MPs and could have ensured some were turfed out of contention as electorate candidate for unsavoury behaviour (why do you think 15 MPs 'retired' from National this year?).  But we did not see this happening.  Each MP should also be aware of the party rules and be conscious of the fact that leaky ships do not reach their destinations.

With my own eyes this year I have seen some of the behind the scenes at electorate and regional level of the Labour party.  The jockeying and attempted deal making and backstabbing has left a sour taste in my mouth.  Some candidates were caustic and juvenile in their dealings with certain sectors of the party which meant that some sectors were then very non-supportive of those candidates and sometimes this spilled out into the public arena.  Some potential candidates were treated poorly, and others behaved like spoiled brats when they did not get what they wanted.

We are all human and we will make mistakes in the heat of the moment, but it is how you behave and present yourself after the fact that makes a difference.  And some people did not present themselves in the best light at all.

Leadership for me has been a huge issue in the last 15 months.  It is only when you are led by a less than desirable leader that you realise how lucky you have been previously and what the qualities of a good or great leader really are.  I've been involved in a lot of discussions and collected a number of quotes and memes that speak to me about leadership.  So here I will share some:

On Sunday I came across a guest blog for The Daily Blog on the Labour leadership issue by Anjum Rahman, Loyalty, Leadership and the Labour Party.  Anjum was on the Labour list for the 2014 election.  She is an accountant and a community leader in Hamilton, especially supporting ethnic and immigration issues, but has interests across the broader Hamilton community.  This piece which Anjum wrote stood out to me in particular:

But he (David Cunliffe) was always going to struggle with a caucus he hadn’t won over, and who weren’t prepared to accept the wishes of the membership.  And more than that, there are divisions in the Party that run a lot deeper than the Caucus leadership issue....

So, when there is a disconnect between caucus and membership, there really is only one solution.  Caucus must abide by the wishes of the membership in good faith.  That’s a pretty reasonable request, especially given the membership are the ones who put in so much work on the ground to run campaigns and to keep the Party machinery going, as well as providing significant financial support through fundraising and personal donations.

Caucus members who are unwilling to respect the vote of the membership should seriously reconsider their positions within the Party and as MPs.  For those who are electorate MPs, if they think their electorates voted them in regardless of their being a Labour candidate, let them test that theory by running as an independent in a by-election.  Because frankly, if they are not willing to work positively with the elected leader, then they are a liability to the Party.

The same applies to those in elected positions within the Party hierarchy.  If they aren’t prepared to support the elected leader, then it’s time to step aside.  The Party needs a governing council that is prepared to back its leader and to discipline MPs who have failed to act in the best interests of the Party, particularly those who openly or through leaks, use the media to damage the leadership.

I think Anjum has summed up the feeling of the membership when she wrote this post on Saturday.  Kiaora Anjum for writing a piece so thoughtful and succinct.

It is time for the Labour Party to meet the standard when it comes to leadership and following the wishes of the membership.  Failure to meet that standard will mean another devastating loss to National in 2017, and that would be catastrophic for too many people.

Dear Hekia Parata, diddums about the chalk in your car park, but $359 million could be spent so much better.

These two pictures came through my Facebook timeline over the last ten hours.  They were posted by Hekia Parata, the Minister of Education, herself, condemning primary teachers and principals for defacing public property with.... CHALK!!!

Gee those teachers were bad arsed!! 

But if you went to her page and checked out the comments you would be shocked.  Apparently teachers should be arrested for doing such a thing!

Naturally I couldn't not post responses to some of the ignorant posts made in regards to the actions and the intent of the teachers who protested up and down the country yesterday morning.  Not only was Hekia's office targeted, but many of her National party MP colleagues as well as opposition MPs such as Chris Hipkins, Phil Goff, Phil Twyford and Tracy Martin.  Some choose to go out to meet and greet the teachers.  Hekia did not.  Here is a smattering of photos I have gleaned off the Stand Up For Kids - Protect our Schools Facebook page where there are so many more - you people are magic:



Trevor Mallard's Hutt South office.



With Tracy Martin of New Zealand First - some did a 1.5 hour round trip to meet with Tracy.



Phil Twyford of Te Atatu.



Mark Mitchell's office in Rodney.



Iain Lees-Galloway's office in Palmerston North



John Key's electorate office.



Nick Smith's office in Nelson.



Phil Goff in Mt Roskill listening to NZEI.



Maggie Barry's North Shore office.



Hone Harawira was also delivered a message for Internet Mana to consider.



Chris Hipkin's electorate office.

Anyway, I was so incensed by Hekia being offended by a little chalk that I wrote this wee posting on one of her photos.  I wonder if she will read it.

Dear Hekia Parata,

If you really want to make a difference in the lives of our children, in their learning outcomes, then I urge you to listen and work with our primary sector to make meaningful progress.

You want me to be a more effective teacher? Then give me the support (teacher aides and specialists) to support the children with special needs in my class - and for more than an hour a day, because anyone one of those three kids can spin out for no apparent reason at any point in time.

The biggest things that stop me from being the best teacher I can be are managing the erratic behaviour of the above kids, paperwork that doesn't benefit my kids and lack of support for kids who should be getting special ed funding.

That is why I support the assertion by NZEI that the $359 million for IES would be better off spent directly on the students themselves.

Currently we have a group of students alienated from our education system due to the fact that their behaviour and/or learning styles are not being catered for at secondary level and they end up being excluded.

I heard a mother speak about her son in Hamilton at your PAI meeting and your response was appalling.

Schools work blimmin' hard to keep these kids in, but they are not financially resourced to put into place personnel to support these kids without MOE funding. GSE is so understaffed now that a school is lucky if they see anyone or get a case worker appointed. The system does not work for these kids no matter how great the quality of the teachers involved are or the decisions the BOT makes. And the reason many of these kids get excluded is because they become a safety risk for the other kids and teachers because they have not been catered for due to the previously mentioned reasons.

I have a friend who has been in the same situation with her son. He lasted 8 weeks in year 9 at College this year. I know how hard the DP and HOD of learning support there worked to keep that boy in school. They were lucky to get support for him, but it was not enough - the wrap around service didn't go all the way round. That boy is intelligent but his conduct issues do not suit main stream schooling. In his rural town what are his schooling options now he is 14 and been out of school for two terms? What does his future hold: a lifetime of being a productive member of society or one of being a drain on society? What would cost less in the long run: giving this boy a true wrap around service or the cost of possibly a life involving benefits and jail?

I'm sick of seeing kids who clearly need help that I'm not skilled in, such as speech language therapy, turned down for help because they don't meet a threshold or there's no funding or a lack of staff to take them on. By denying those kids help you condemn them to a life of struggle in their education journey and limit their options for further study and work when they leave school. You also end up taking away from the rest of the class because I spend more time working with that child who did not get the speech language therapy they needed and now have ongoing learning issues.

Spend the money on the kids who need it and then they have a more effective learning journey and become productive members of society. Don't, and you extend all of societies problems in crime, violence, child abuse, substance abuse, homelessness, reliance on benefits, poor health.....

Meeting the candidates for election 2014

It's election year.  There are election hoardings competing for space on every fence and scrap of green grass facing a busy thoroughfare.  There are politicians up and down the country door knocking, pressing the flesh and kissing babies.  And the television debates have started.

Different groups are also holding meet the candidate breakfasts, lunches and evening meetings.

On Monday 4 August, Matamata NZEI Branch held a meet the candidates night at the Matamata Club.  In attendance were the following candidates and representatives:

• Susan Cullen - Maori Party candidate for Hauraki-Waikato electorate
• Tracy Martin - New Zealand First Deputy Leader and Education Spokesperson and current List MP
• Dr Ron Smith - ACT candidate for Hamilton East
• Lindsay Tisch - National candidate for Waikato and current MP for Waikato
• Catherine Delahunty - Green Party Education Spokesperson and candidate for Coromandel electorate and current List MP
• Christine Greer - Labour Party candidate for Waikato electorate

All the speakers were wonderful participants, and you can read the Storify below to see how the night went.

On Tuesday 19 August, the Waikato NZEI Branch held a meet the candidates night at the Methodist Hall in Hamilton.  In attendance were the following candidates and representatives:

• David Bennett - National candidate for Hamilton East and current MP
• Nanaia Mahuta - Labour candidate for Hauraki-Waikato and current MP
• Sue Moroney - Labour candidate for Hamilton West and current List MP
• Cliff Allen - Labour candidate for Hamilton East
• Mark Servian - Green Party candidate for Hamilton East
• Katrina Day - Conservatives candidate for Hamilton East
• Ray Calver - Internet Mana candidate for Hamilton East
• Carolyn McKenzie - Democrats for Social Credit candidate for Hamilton East

Sadly Tim McIndoe was not present and no representatives attended from New Zealand First, ACT or the Mäori Party.

Below is a Storify of the tweets I sent out and received that night and after reflection the next morning.  There is also some commentary I have put in to round out the night.

Meet the candidate nights are all very well to get a gage of the person who may well be representing you in parliament after the election, but it is also vital that you do the following:

• Read the policies of the parties different parties, including National (who has released stuff all policy so far) and ACT and the Conservatives (who have scary ideas about education!).
• Meet any and all of the candidates in your electorate
• Most NZEI branches are organising meet the candidates nights, so are many other groups.  So find one and go to it.
• Find out where/how you can meet your candidates. Follow them on fb and/or Twitter.  Read their blogs.
• Go to the party websites and read the policies.  Follow their blogs, fb pages and Twitter feeds.  Labour even has an Instagram account now.
• Don't rely on the media to tell you what each party stands for. All you'll get is John Key & co telling you that everyone else is wrong and the personality sideshow of Colin Craig & Dotcom.  So dig a little deeper.

I have published this blog much later than I intended.  This was due to a lot of events happening including a busy time at school and moving house.  Thanks for reading anyway, and I hope it was helpful.

Poverty in New Zealand: The New Haves and the Have Nots.

On Tuesday July 29th, Nigel Latta's new series, simply titled Nigel Latta, began.  The first episode focused on poverty, subtitled The New Haves and Have Nots.  The show focused on poverty, inequality, how easy it is to land in the poverty trap, the working poor, trickle down economics, food banks and the despair of being trapped by debt.

The statistics on poverty in New Zealand have escalated over the last six years.  It is estimated that 270,000 children are in poverty in New Zealand.  The meme to the right says that 40% of children living in poverty are from the working poor, meaning that someone in their household is in work but it is not enough to lift their household out of the poverty trap.

We have kids coming to school from damp cold homes, malnourished and poorly dressed.  Often they are left in the care of older siblings or adults who are not their parents as their parents work long hours to put food on the table and pay for the basics in life.  Every now and again a curve ball is thrown at the family, for example a large mechanic's bill when the car fails the warrant or a family member dies in a distant town, so the family borrows from a loan shark at exorbitant interest rates, and the family is sucked further down into the poverty vortex trapped by owing money they can't afford to pay back.

And that makes me angry too.  Because if we are not doing right by these children today, what sort of adults will they grow up to be?  How will they teach their kids about money?  How will they treat us when they are running this country and we are old and dottery and can't look after ourselves?  To me there is a clear opportunity for karma, for what goes around comes around.  So we have to pay attention to this situation.  Now.

And one thing that stood out, while watching this programme, is how poverty becomes inter-generational, how we are handing down poverty from parent to child to grandchild.

During the airing of this show I live tweeted and below is a Storify collection of my tweets and the responses I got, as well as the tweets of others which spoke to me on the night as well.

As I watched this documentary with my parents, it caused a great deal of discussion.  My Mum and I are openly supportive of the left, but my Dad likes to play devil's advocate and claims to be on the right.  But that night, and on many other occasions of late, he said some decidedly left wing statements. 

My Dad is a truck driver.  He starts early in the morning.  He's also driven late into the night at other jobs.  He sees, at times, where the homeless are.  It is a growing problem.

My Mum is a trauma nurse, so she meets people of all socio-economic levels who live in all sorts of situations.  There are times when she has a patient who is homeless, and sometimes their condition means they can not be released from hospital unless they have a safe, warm place to live.  It is a bit hard if your home is under a bridge, in a cardboard box or a car parked up in a different place each night.

As a teacher I see a variety of students who come from different home situations.  I've taught kids who live in wonderfully warm homes with their own room, hot water, no mould issues and with all the mod cons.  These kids come to school having had a good breakfast, have a variety of great food for lunch, and then go home to a flash as dinner at night.  They wear the latest clothes, although I often find they are not always dressed as warmly as they should be. 

Then I've taught children who's family are bunking in with grandparents or at an aunty's house.  I've taught children from families who have too many people for the bedrooms available in the house.  I've taught children who have come from homes with damp and cold issues, black mould, a lack of heating and insulation.  I've taught children who didn't get a proper breakfast that morning, who may have bought a pie on the way to school instead and will eat another (cold) for lunch.  I've taught children who think eating raw noodle from the packet is a nutritious lunch, or who pick a lemon off the tree as they run to bus for lunch.  And I've taught children who have gone home to no nutritious evening meal.  I've taught kids who come to school in ill fitting clothes, clothes with major holes that are worn out.  I've taught kids who come to school with no shoes, no warm clothes on bitterly cold days.  I've taught kids with chronic health problems such as asthma, glue ear, repeated chest or throat infections, school sores.... because of their living conditions and/or lack of access to healthcare.

Most of those kids came from homes where at least one parent was working. 

What does that say about the ability of people to be able to provide the basics for their children?

To me that tells me the following:

• the cost of housing is too high.
• the state of that housing is too low.
• expenses like food, electricity and healthcare are too high.
• people are not earning enough money to house, feed and clothe their kids.

I have taught in a variety of schools, from decile one to ten, and these kids are at all of them.  At the lower end it is the majority of kids in all classes.  At the upper end there are one or two families at least in every class who face these issues.

And I have to say it has gotten worse in the 19 years I have been a teacher, and even more so in the last six years.

National came into government with the catch cry of a Brighter Future.  Well I think they failed the standard on that one.  The only futures which have gotten brighter in my opinion are those who already had a financial advantage and have taken further advantage with National's policies.

Paula Bennett, the Social Development Minister, seems to have some large blinkers on when it comes to poverty.  Being blinded to an issue that is a key part of your portfolio seems somewhat arrogant to me. 

Paula Bennett is the woman who was a solo mother at a young age; took advantage of the housing loan scheme provided by the government of the day to purchase her own home; when being a working mum was too tough went on the DPB; used the training incentive allowance to get her tertiary education (at which time she slagged off that National government for putting her in debt with a student loan); and who then became a National Party MP and the Minister who pulled up the ladder behind her so others could not have the same success as her and then tells us that children slide in and out of poverty on a daily, if not hourly, basis and that she has no statistics on poverty.

And it really doesn't look like National's attitude is changing either.  This is how a growing number of people see John Key and his National led government.  They don't see National as having their best interests at heart or that of the country.

So is New Zealand really ready to do something about it?  What are the alternatives?

This link will take you to the policies which Labour has announced so far.  They have policies addressing housing, health, education, food in schools, employment and more that aim to improve the life of families, children and the wider community.  There are many links to choose from on the page the link above connects to, and all these policies interlink as there is no one solution to poverty.  Each major policy area has its own comprehensive manifesto.  Links to the full manifesto for that area can usually be found at the bottom of the page of the issue you click on.

This link will take you to the policies which the Green party has announced so far.  Their key pivot for addressing child poverty is their Schools as Community Hubs policy, which I have written about in a previous post, Kids at the Heart of Education Nationwide Tour - Hamilton Public Library.

This link will take you to the policies for New Zealand First and what they have announced so far and to their 2014 manifesto which is 101 pages long!  The first of their fifteen principals is to put New Zealanders first and Winston is always adamant that his policies are for all New Zealanders and that those New Zealanders who find themselves in genuine and deserving need are looked after.

FYI: Georgina Beyer, former Labour MP, is standing for Mana in Te Tai Tonga in 2014.

This link will take you to the separate policies of the Mana and Internet parties that have been announced so far.  One of the key kaupapa stated on the Mana website is it "will promote policies that allow all New Zealanders to lead a good life".   And since the Internet Party is such a new entity I believe it is still developing it's core vision, but it seems to be attracting a lot of disaffected voters.  Sadly I missed the Mana Internet roadshow as it travelled through the Waikato.  I would have been interested to go along and hear all the hub hub.

This link will take you to the policies the Maori Party have announced so far.  Essentially their policy hinges on Whanau Ora, which they have enacted through their support for the National led government.  Some may argue that Whanau Ora has been in play and despite it poverty in New Zealand has increased.  I am going to put this argument out there: how much worse would poverty have been if it wasn't for Whanau Ora being put into practice?  I think we can say, without a doubt, that Whanau Ora is not in the full form that Tariana Turia would truly have wanted it to be implemented in; that National and ACT and United Future, as the other partners in government, have all watered it down somewhat.

This link will take you to the policies of United Future which have been announced so far.  Peter Dunne will, in my opinion, be lucky to still be in parliament after 20 September, but I've included his party anyway.  United Future is the party that has almost consistently been in government, having been a coalition partner to both National and Labour since soon after its formation.  Even though it seems less likely that he'd jump into bed with Labour after the 2014 election, Peter Dunn could work with them if it meant he got a ministerial portfolio.

I'm not going to bother putting up links to the other parties.  It's not just that I'm philosophically opposed to the other parties, but I have some clear reasons:

• National - despite it being just under six weeks until election day, National still hasn't released any policy, and Lindsay Tisch (MP for Waikato) told a meeting I was at last Monday that the policies for 2014 were yet to be released.  So I'm not putting in a link to the 2011 policies.  I think National will put most policy out in the last 3-4 weeks before the election, after it has seen everyone else's policy, but then do a whole pile of stuff they did not tell you if they get into government again - just like they did in 2009 (e.g. National Standards and putting up GST) and 2011 (e.g. Charter Schools).
• ACT - they really don't see that there is a poverty issue in New Zealand.  Their philosophy is so orbiting another planet it isn't funny.  I am hoping that Epsom voters do not allow themselves to be led by the nose to vote for David Seymour because he comes across as arrogant and entitled and their leader, Jamie Whyte, has no bloody idea what he's talking about.  Whyte's comments earlier this year in regards to incest as well as his having no idea what Whanau Ora was on Maori TV's  Native Affairs last Monday makes him a laughing stock of politics.  Combined with seeing their Hamilton East candidate, Dr Ron Smith, in action last week, I have come to the conclusion they are all a bunch of loonies.
• Conservatives - I can't take Colin Craig seriously.  Here is a guy that is sinking all his money into his dream of getting into politics, but who has self-sabotaged with his theories of the moon landing and chem trails, not to mention threatening everyone with a law suit/tantrum if he doesn't get his way!!  Yep, another bunch of loonies circling a distant moon.

So that is what you can do election wise.  But what practical measures could you take?

• buy an extra can or dried goods from the supermarket and pop it in those food bank collectors they have at the check outs.
• or deliver some extra goods or a money donation directly to your local food bank.
• volunteer at the homeless shelter to cook for the homeless.
• if you know a family who would struggle to buy clothes, have a clear out of the kids clothes that no longer fit them and drop them off to that family.
• there are some people in various towns that are running their own initiatives to help the homeless or struggling.  Campbell Live has covered some of these groups.
• make a donation to your local school towards the kids whose families can't pay for the extras like camps or visiting performers or to be in a sports team.

And I would recommend that if you haven't watched Nigel Latta's programme on poverty, you really should.  The link is at the top of this post.

Novopay: A dog with fleas, a bad case of fleas.

Novopay is a dog with fleas.  Steven Joyce said that in February 2013 a couple of weeks after John Key gave him the responsibility of fixing Novopay aka Nopay, Novopain or Nevapay... we in the education profession have found the only fun in Novopay, apart from the surprise of actually being paid, is making up new names to describe its poor performance.

Here we are 18 months later and Steven makes this announcement:

After pouring $45 million in to fix Novopay, the teachers' payroll system is no longer a "dog" and teachers will be thankful that the Government has taken it over, Prime Minister John Key says.

Senior Cabinet Minister Steven Joyce, who last year described Novopay as "a dog" today said a Government-owned company would assume management of the system from Australian company Talent2 from October this year.

He said "pretty good progress" had been made in recent months to fix the system which has been plagued with problems including large numbers of over and under payments to teachers since it was introduced in 2012.

However, remaining issues prompted contractual issues in recent weeks and Talent2 had not been prepared to provide extra resources necessary for further development of the system.

It had become clear "that the best outcome would be a change in the provider relationship".

Opposition parties seized on today's announcement as yet another admission from the Government that the system had been a costly disaster, but Mr Key defended the decision.

"If you look forward, the sector will take quite a lot of confidence that effectively the Government is taking over the programme and the project. They'll know it will be properly resourced and properly looked after."

When reminded that Mr Joyce had called it a dog he said, "Yeah, but I think it's come a long way since then".

"It's actually fundamentally operating pretty well. This is a very complex sector there's a lot of different pay scales for teachers it's not an easy thing. But the Government has stabilized it and got it working reasonably effectively and I think a lot of teachers will say thank goodness the Government now has some control over the process."

He said it was possible to make the argument the Government should have assumed control earlier, "and hindsight's a wonderful thing".

However the Government had now made "the right call" over the system which he said was originally signed up to by the previous Labour Government.

President of the New Zealand Principals' Federation Philip Harding said his members were encouraged that Talent2 had withdrawn from managing the system, but warned "there is a long way to go before principals will have any confidence in the system".

"'The announcement does not cure the Novopay shambles that the sector has been battling for the last three years."

"The same challenges of random errors, frustratingly slow problem resolution, inaccurate personnel data, and significantly increased workload will continue," he said.

"Success will be determined by the way the new entity is managed, and more importantly, resourced to deal to these priorities."

Meanwhile, Mr Joyce earlier confirmed Talent2 will pay the Ministry of Education between $18 million and $22 million including $7m cash and other considerations such as license to use the core software by way of a settlement.

That sum was set against the $45 million the Government had paid to address the problems with the system. Overall Novopay had cost $110 million to date.

Mr Joyce said the agreement for the Government to take over should ''not necessarily be seen as failure on anyone's part any more than it had been''.

It was, he said, ''the next logical step''.

''This decision has been made in the best interests of all parties - staff administrators, schools and the Government.''

Talent2 said the "mutual agreement" settled a "flawed contractual arrangement" between itself and the Ministry of Education.

"This change allows Talent2 to better focus resources and investment on its core payroll business and broader New Zealand client base."

Labour's education spokesman Chris Hipkins said the announcement today would be "cold comfort to teachers and school staff still struggling with Novopay" and Talent2 was "dropping a hot potato in the taxpayer's lap".

"Goodness knows how much more (money) will be shovelled down this black hole before the problems are finally fixed."

He questioned why Education Minister Hekia Parata signed off on the system and why it had taken Mr Joyce so long "to finally decide to take action".

"Teachers and school staff have waited long enough for Novopay to be fixed. It has taken up their valuable teaching time, as well as hours and hours of school administration. Students and parents have also paid the price for this ongoing uncertainty."

NZ First education spokeswoman Tracey Martin said Mr Joyce had "admitted defeat" in cutting Talent2 loose.

"Mr Joyce cannot fix a system that National got so wrong in the first place, and has wasted tens of millions of taxpayers' dollars on."
(Novopay no longer a 'dog' - PM NZ Herald 30 July 2014)

Steven, we'll believe it when we see it mate.

You could talk to a cluster of schools and find that a significant portion of those schools are still experiencing issues.  Personally I believe Novopay has completely stuffed up my sick leave entitlements somehow and their pay slips would frazzle the mind of a top mathematician because they are incomprehensible.  But my concerns are minor in comparison to the people who still play Novopay Lotto every second Wednesday as they check their bank accounts to see if they have been paid or not.

But this also puts fear into principals and support staff who deal with the fall out of Novopay on a daily basis.  How will this new organisation cope with the End of Year actions that Novopay has failed so badly at for the last two Decembers?

And Metiria Turei raised an excellent point on One News Tonight and on Radio New Zealand's Checkpoint (sorry I couldn't get a link to the clip with Metiria on the late news but here is the one without her from One News at Six) about if National were to win the Treasury Benches on 20 September, is this move a step backwards into the 1990s to reintroduce the bulk funding of teachers' salaries and devolving pay roll responsibilities to schools? 

When Corin Dann asked John Key if it did mean bulk funding was on the horizon, John Key said no.  But teachers have heard John Key say no about a lot of things in education and then watch those things being introduced.  So teachers do not trust John Key.

Another concerning aspect is the government's adamant demand that the teacher pay roll has to be simplified.  Good luck.  It is not simple because teachers are not one size fits all.  Some teachers take on many more roles within their schools and consequently have to be adequately recompensed.  During our last primary teachers collective agreement negotiations, the MOE tried to have many of our hard fought for allowances scrapped.  We would not agree to that.  People deserved to be paid for the extra responsibilities they take on and the effort they put in.  Schools wouldn't function with out that effort and kids would miss out.

A member of Stand up for kids - protect our schools  on Facebook posted this copy of an email from Peter Hughes, the Secretary of Education, which was sent out today.

From: Peter Hughes <Peter.Hughes@minedu.govt.nz>
Date: 30 July 2014 12:45:15 pm NZST
Subject: Message from Peter Hughes

Good afternoon,

Earlier today the Minister Responsible for Novopay, Hon Steven Joyce, announced that school payroll services will transfer to Crown management on 17 October. I have provided a link to Minister Joyce’s press release here.

I thought it would be useful if I explained to you the reason for this change.

As you are probably aware, our plan was always to have a fully outsourced payroll system for the Education sector. The Ministry wanted to focus on its core business – supporting you to raise student achievement.

We ran into some major problems with Novopay. It meant that the Ministry had to get back involved to try and make things right and ensure you were getting the levels of service you are entitled to expect.

We have come a long way, with a steady pay period to pay period performance that is now well within the acceptable error levels defined by the Novopay technical review. However, to deliver on your expectations, we need to go further. At the moment we have a model where responsibilities and accountabilities are split across two organisations, and the Ministry is diverting time and energy away from what we should be focussing on.

From 17 October there will be a single Government-owned company solely focussed on managing school payroll services end-to-end. There will be clear accountability and expectations from the Government on ensuring staff get paid correctly on time, every time. It will be a company that is service-driven, not focussing on a commercial bottom line.

We will make sure the new company supports schools in the right way and we will focus on what we should be focussing on - raising student achievement and improving educational support to your schools.

We intend to transition Talent2 staff working on schools payroll into the new company to ensure the handover goes smoothly.

This new model will allow us to further improve payroll delivery and school support. The new arrangements will help us deliver the simpler, more user friendly service that you’ve been asking for. This change is in the best interests of the Ministry, of Talent 2 and most importantly of you and your teams.

I’ll keep you all up to date as the transition progresses. If you have any questions please feel free to get in touch with me directly, or with your local Director of Education.

Kind regards,

Peter

Peter Hughes | Secretary for Education | Office of the Secretary for Education

This email is soothing to the naked eye, however I still feel unease that staff from the existing organisation will still be involved.  Yes, I understand they know the system, however, they have consistently provided a not positive experience for the last two years, so you question them naturally.

And naturally the unions have something to say.

In this press release, Government Novopay buy-out too late and schools still paying, NZEI makes a valid point about the monies still owing to some schools, some of that money from 2012, and there is also the issue of the extra workload on the principal and admin support staff.

Chris Hipkins in his post Taxpayer to fork out millions for Novopay rescue points out who signed off  this dog with fleas.  He also pointed out how much money has already been wasted on Novopay and how much it was costing to buy Talent2 out of the Novopay and future running costs.  I can tell you that Chris Hipkins says that Labour is discussing the Novopay issue and believes that something has to change from the current system.  Chris has said it may mean dumping the system completely and starting again.

In the Herald this morning there is an accusation that the government is trying to appease teachers by announcing these changes now in the lead up to the election.  Novopay move slated as a diversion says "Chris Hipkins, Labour's education spokesman, said the Government was trying to divert attention from Novopay before the election campaign because "teachers will be confronting National MPs and candidates with the clear message that Novopay hasn't been fixed"."  Which John Key countered with "the education sector "will take quite a lot of confidence that effectively the Government is taking over the program and the project. They'll know it will be properly resourced and properly looked after.""

Well Mr Key, the education sector does not trust your government.  You guys made Novopay go live despite the fact their were close to 200 flaws identified that weren't remedied when the go ahead was given (see Why Hekia Parata (and Anne, Craig and Bill) should go, Novopay - or Nevapay, Bullshit John Key says, Why Steven Joyce should just man up and dump Novopay) and then the buck passing and incompetence that has followed.

Teachers also don't believe or trust you Mr Key because your government has not consulted or listened to the education sector about anything in your education policy - National Standards, Charter Schools, truancy services, special education, residential schools, Te Kotahitanga, performance pay, IES roles, class sizes, professional development/Advisory Services..... the list goes on.

Mr Key says Novopay is not so much of a dog anymore, but teachers, principals and support staff will be more reserved.  While pleased that Talent2 will be taken out of the equation somewhat, we are wary.  Quite frankly, teachers will be watching from October to see if this new crown enterprise to take on Novopay will meet the standard or not.  I'll report back later in the year.