Too much & too little

Kerre Woodham highlights another example of Labour’s spending too much and too little:

And then further to the Ministry of Education and further around the education portfolio, there’s a story from BusinessDesk this morning showing that the Ministry of Education’s consulting bills surged by 450% since 2019. 450% in five years (really four years). They went to the top-tier consultancy firms, ones like Beca that picked up $15 million over 5 years, PwC, $13 million, KPMG $7.7 million.   . . 

So they’re consulting up for buildings, they’re consulting out for what you would imagine a ministry exists for, which is creating and developing a curriculum for schools. And the other thing that really grinds my gears is when you look at that, so they’re contracting out for curriculum, which is what you’d imagine the ministry would do, so there’d be fewer staff at the Ministry of Education wouldn’t there? Because if they’re not doing what you would imagine they exist to do, there wouldn’t be many staff. The number of teachers employed by state schools rose by just over 5 per cent from 2017 to 2022. By the same period, the number of full-time staff employed at the Ministry of Education ballooned by 55 per cent.  

So not only are they contracting out everything, they’re employing more staff. Like loads more stuff. 1700 more staff than was employed in 2016. What are they doing? Coming up with new ways to spend money, new inventive ways to spend money. How on earth can you justify farming out your curriculum? While taking on 55% more staff?    . . 

Far too much was spent on consultants and bureaucrats and far too little was spent on teachers, support staff and the buildings in which they teach.

This is another example of Labour, and the Ministries for which is was responsible, getting their priorities wrong and spending far too much in the wrong places at the expense of services and the people who deliver them.

Govt waste highlighted at Jonesies

The Taxpayers’ Union highlighted government waste with its annual Jonesies Waste Awards yesterday:

Jonesie Waste Awards 2023

In a year fraught with challenges and uncertainties, The Taxpayers’ Union took it upon themselves to shine a light on the spending choices made by our governing entities. Presenting to you, the Jonesies Waste Awards 2023.
 
Local Government Nominees:
 
1. Otago Regional Council’s Wallaby Nightmare: Despite pouring more than $2.76 million and dedicating over 26,000 hours, the Otago Regional Council managed to capture only 18 wallabies. Price per wallaby? A whopping $153,422.72. It would’ve been cheaper to send them back to Australia on a private jet each.

2. Far North District Council Has Gone Barking Mad: Far North District Council’s transformation of Melka Kennels for 24 dogs, with a budget of $200,000, skyrocketed to $2.4 million for just 10 dogs. That’s $240,000 for each dog. And thanks to funds from the Covid “shovel-ready” Provincial Growth Fund grant, we all paid for it.

3. Auckland’s Transport Shun Their Services at Our Cost: In 2022, Auckland Transport staff appeared to fly more than they rode their own buses. $189,993.47 went on flights, $27,524.16 on Ubers and taxis, dwarfing the mere $4,778.04 spent on bus services. It seems that Auckland Transport agree with residents that their service isn’t up to scratch.

4. Hamilton’s Botched Bus Stop: Hamilton City Council in a joint project with Waka Kotahi, spent $2.5 million on building, tearing down and then rebuilding a bus stop. The project started four months later than planned and went $500,000 over the budgeted cost. Once construction was completed they realised that the concrete path had been laid at the wrong angle making it a risk to wheelchair users. After significant financial investment, they managed to make the bus stop less usable. Eventually, the new bus shelters had to be removed and then reinstalled in order to allow the work to be completed.

5. Horowhenua District Council’s Landfill Liability: Initially estimated at $7,500, the Horowhenua District Council’s consultancy costs for evaluating a landfill’s profitability skyrocketed to $895,000 without a formal business plan or contract in sight. 
 
 
Top Honours for Local Government Wastefulness: The Otago Regional Council!
 
 
Central Government Nominees:

1. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Private School Privileges: Taxpayers have forked out $4,999,823 for private schooling for diplomats’ kids in many countries with similar or superior state schooling to New Zealand. Despite Kiwi state education in ruins, 63 diplomats sent their kids to prestigious private schools internationally on the taxpayer dollar. $74,776.98 was spent in Australia and $817,410.14 in the US. Other countries included China, Korea, the UK, France, Germany, Netherlands, Japan, Ireland and Canada.

2. Let’s Get Wellington Moving, The Gaff That Keeps on Giving: The Cobham Drive crossing spearheaded by Let’s Get Wellington Moving came with a price tag of $2.4 million, with consultancy fees alone amounting to $500,000.

3. Ministry for Pacific Peoples’ Golden Goodbye Gala: The Ministry for Pacific Peoples hosted a $40,000 farewell bash for its former CEO, a lavish affair during tough economic times. The breakdown of the expenses includes $7,500 on gifts, $3,000 on photographers, drummers and flowers. $7,000 on travel and accommodation for specific attendees.

4. Ministry of Health, Penny For Our Thoughts: The Ministry of Health spent $334,000 seeking public opinions on its performance, and developing graphics highlighting the fact that barely anyone thinks they’re doing a good job. One social media graphic they promoted proudly said that only 6% had a positive view of them.

5. Ministry of Education’s Dot Com Bust: The Ministry of Education spent $100,000 on the development of a new website before deciding it wasn’t necessary and never launched it. It appears they began developing the site before realising they were creating a new online hub this year so the site would become obsolete almost immediately. $100,000 with nothing to show for it.
 
 
Lifetime Achievement in Waste: 

Donovan Clarke, the former Chief Executive (CE) of Toitū te Waiora, a Government Workforce Development Council, faced scrutiny over extravagant overseas expenditures on the taxpayer’s dime. Clarke’s expenses included lavish meals like lobster feasts and calamari canapés, daily late-night taxi rides, and considerable room service charges at his four-star hotel. Interestingly, the conference he attended was organized by the Council of Ambulance Authorities, chaired by David Waters, Clarke’s own chairman. In one instance, Clarke indulged in an extravagant seafood dinner, followed by a taxi ride at 3:36 am to his hotel, only to leave for the airport just three hours later. After landing, Clarke charged taxpayers $22 for breakfast and $80 for access to Singapore Airlines’ luxury sky lounge. Many of his expenses were ambiguously labeled, raising questions about the identity of his dining companions. In his first 11 months as CE, Clarke spent $72,862.03 on his taxpayer-funded credit card, more than double the amount of his five CE counterparts combined. Despite Toitū te Waiora’s 2022 Annual Report, which Clarke approved, emphasizing its ‘Sensitive Expenditure Policy’, questions arose about its enforcement or adherence. Subsequent to the arising queries, Clarke was placed on six months of paid leave before resigning after an employment dispute costing taxpayers nearly $328,000 in various fees. The exact amount given to Clarke as part of a severance deal remains undisclosed. Satirically, there’s speculation about a dispute over a taxpayer-funded lobster-bib, which remains unconfirmed. The article concludes by hoping that Clarke stays away from taxpayer-funded roles in the future and jests about his extravagant tastes. His cost to the taxpayer has been truly epic. And we hope you agree that he’s a worthy winner.

The Jonesies are named after Shane Jones, which provides a timely reminder to use votes wisely to ensure he doesn’t return to parliament.

Govt agencies making housing crisis worse

This is why we have a housing crisis :

Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency has come out against a proposed residential and business development near Cromwell.

The government agency said, in a plan change submission, it opposed the Parkburn proposal because of climate change concerns and the relatively isolated location of the development.

Fulton Hogan runs a large quarry in the area — about 10km west of Cromwell — but it is nearing the end of its life.

The company had applied to the Central Otago District Council for a plan change to develop a residential/business centre where the quarry now sits. The planned site is beside Pisa Moorings. . . 

Early plans had shown more than 500 residential sections would be in the development and there would be space for shops and a restaurant/bar.

Waka Kotahi said in its submission it considered the proposed location of the site was quite remote from the existing main urban environments within the Central Otago district.

The Waka Kotahi submission said the subdivision would be about 10km from Cromwell, 40km from Alexandra and 45km from Wānaka and, since there was no public transport, heavy reliance on the use of private vehicles was expected. . . 

It also highlighted further consideration had to be made for carbon emissions and potential climate change effects for the future development.

It said the development of the site was unlikely to result in a significant uptake of active transport modes such as walking and cycling nor a reduction in a reliance on private vehicle trips. There was no provisions made for public transport. . . 

Waka Kotahi doesn’t appear to understand that anyone using petrol or diesel-fuelled vehicles would be paying for their emissions because they are fully covered by the ETS..

And it’s not the only government agency wanting to stop more houses being built:

In its submission, the Ministry of Education said the proposal would place pressure on schools in Cromwell with an influx of people coming into the region.

“The boost in dwellings constitute a sudden large addition to the number of total dwellings and total rating units, at a scale and pace that is larger than projected numbers. This growth is at a faster rate than that anticipated by the Ministry of Education,” it said. . . 

Are the Ministry’s projected numbers set in concrete?

When did its role become the arbiter of where residential development and population growth take place?

How can we believe the government is serious about addressing the housing crisis when its agencies put up road blocks to development?

This is typical of a public service, and government, that wield the power that puts road blocks in the way of progress instead of removing them.

Not only are they part of the problem, they get in the way of people with solutions and that’s one of the reasons we have a housing crisis.

Science without the sciences

What sort of thinking comes up with a science curriculum without physics, chemistry and biology? The sort of thinking you get from what Michael Johnston calls the Ministry of Ignorance:

. . .The Ministry of Education has recently produced a draft of the ‘refreshed’ curriculum for school science. But calling this document a science curriculum is far too generous. It is a blueprint for accelerating the decline of science in New Zealand.

Central concepts in physics are absent. There is no mention of gravity, electromagnetism, thermodynamics, mass or motion. Chemistry is likewise missing in action. There is nothing about atomic structure, the periodic table of the elements, compounds or molecular bonding.

These are key concepts for any student wanting to study the physical sciences or engineering at university. The universities will have to prepare themselves to teach science from scratch. If the Ministry gets its way, our schools will no longer be doing it.

What, you might be wondering, does the draft curriculum cover?

It seems that everything in science, from early primary school through to Year 13, will be taught through just four contexts: climate change, biodiversity, the food-energy-water nexus, and infectious diseases.

These are all important topics, but they do not comprise the general science education that is our young people’s birthright. In fact, to understand these things with any degree of sophistication, a solid understanding of basic science concepts and theories is required.  

No doubt Ministry officials think that young people will find these topics attractive. They may be right. But if they are not systematically taught the basic theoretical content upon which study of these matters depends, they will never understand them. Initial attraction will turn to frustration. The likelihood of our best and brightest finding their places on the shoulders of giants like Rutherford and MacDiarmid will be diminished.

School students may well get the idea that these topics are all there is to science. They will encounter them again and again, year after year. There are so many wonderful, intensely fascinating concepts to encounter in the physical sciences – atomic theory, Newtonian mechanics, optics and many more. But, learning under the ‘refreshed’ curriculum, young New Zealanders won’t even know these things exist, much less understand them.

Just as disturbing as what is absent from the new science curriculum, is that the curriculum writers don’t appear even to know what science is. The document reads as if it was written by bureaucrats, not scientists. It opens with a ‘purpose statement’, outlining three overarching things that students are supposed to learn.

The first reads, “science is developed by people being curious about, observing and investigating the natural world.” That is true – curiosity is an important attribute of scientists. Observation and investigation are key elements of scientific methods. But these are not the things that make science unique as an approach to understanding the universe.

What makes science unique is its highly refined, methodical, approach to investigation, linked to the logic of theory testing. The experimental method is preeminent in this regard. But ‘experiment’ is another word that is absent from the Ministry’s new science curriculum.

Next, the curriculum tells us, students will “develop place-based knowledge of the natural world and experience of the local area in which they live.” Once again, the curriculum developers badly miss the mark.

One of the beautiful things about science is that it takes us beyond the local. It takes us to the distant past of the universe, to the infinitesimal and the unimaginably massive. It gives us understanding of highly counterintuitive and breathtakingly strange phenomena. It entices us to tackle audacious questions. What is life? How did the universe begin? How does the human brain work? These are not ‘place-based’ questions, but universal ones.

The third overarching aim of the science curriculum is to exhort students to “bring knowledge from the past for acting now and in the immediate future.” It is hard to know what that means. It is exactly the kind of specious platitude that litters the mission statements of our public agencies. Whatever it may mean, though, it has nothing much to do with science.

In Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four there were four Ministries – Love, Peace, Plenty, and Truth – which respectively promulgated hate, war, scarcity and propaganda. Our Ministry of Education, which seems determined to promulgate ignorance, would be right at home amongst them.

This new science curriculum is still in draft. It is not yet a public document. It was made available to me by a source to whom the Ministry had sent it for feedback. I asked the Ministry if there is any more recent version. An official responded that there is not, but that a new draft will be available for public consultation in August.

We can only hope that, when the new science curriculum is finally published, it is much improved. There is more chance of that if parents and teachers let the Ministry know that they would like the physical sciences still to be taught in our schools. But it is disturbing that the Ministry has produced a ‘science curriculum’ so bereft of essential aspects of science, even in draft.

The Ministry is setting us up to become a scientific backwater. What would Ernest Rutherford say?

The education system is not just failing pupils, it’s failing the country’s future.

Where will our future health professionals – human and animal – engineers, geologists, researchers, scientists and all the others whose work requires a good grounding in science come from if schools don’t teach the sciences?

Ernest Rutherford said, We haven’t the money, so we’ve got to think. 

Does this sort of unscientific thinking comes from the government or the Ministry by itself?

If it’s the government we can get better thinking by voting them out in three months. If it’s the way those in the Ministry think, the new government will have to ensure they take a much more scientific approach to their thinking and if they can’t, replace them with people who can.

 

All principals equal?

A principal, who stood for Labour in an election, isn’t happy at the idea not all principals are equally good:

A school principal has slammed National Party leader Christopher Luxon for blaming “mixed standards of leadership” across schools for low attendance levels. 

It comes after Newshub revealed last week that just 40 percent of Kiwi kids are attending school regularly, according to fresh figures out from the Ministry of Education.

Figures obtained by Newshub show the breakdown of students who’ve been unenrolled for more than a year by region. Of the nearly 1000 Kiwi kids not attending school for 13 months or more, 527 are in Auckland, 122 are in Waikato and 71 are in the Bay of Plenty. They make up 74 percent of the total.

Luxon told AM on Wednesday the level of kids not attending school is “really incredibly sobering” and there is a “mixed standard of leadership” across New Zealand’s schools.

“So the first thing is we’ve got to make sure the Government is actually putting resources into truancy officers, getting kids to school. We need to make sure we’ve actually got leadership in schools that are actually very much focussed on getting kids into school,” Luxon told AM co-host Ryan Bridge. 

Putting resources into truancy officers and getting kids to school shouldn’t be controversial, nor should the view that not all schools have good leadership. Principals, like any other group have a range of abilities and competence.

Bridge questioned Luxon, saying there are no school leaders in New Zealand who aren’t focused on getting kids into school, but the National Party leader disagreed. 

“There is a mixed standard of leadership across our schools and across our principles which actually means they are not focussing as strongly only on getting kids to school as they can,” Luxon said. 

Hora Hora School principal and Tai Tokerau Principal Association president Pat Newman hit back at Luxon’s remarks, saying his comments point more to a “mixed bag of leadership within politicians”.

There is a mixed bag of leadership within politicians, just as there is in any organisation, including schools.

Luxon said New Zealand doesn’t need to accept “abysmal results” when there are pockets of excellence like Manurewa Intermediate School.

When pressed by Bridge about what school leaders are accepting “abysmal results”, Luxon said there is a mixed standard across the country.

“What I’m talking about is we have standards of excellence where you can get a decile one school delivering high levels of attendance and yet across the whole country, we can’t [deliver high rates of attendance], and it requires a systemic response to say we’re not going to make any more excuses,” Luxon said.

“You can’t run a country and have a future when you have 40 percent of your kids attending school, that’s just not going to cut it. It’s a moral failure.  It’s a social failure. It’s an economic crisis. So we have to all, Government schools and parents, be really accountable for getting our kids to school. That’s what matters most in our education system.”  . . 

Failing children at school is failing their futures and the future of the country.

The reasons for the failures are many, some are complex and start long before children get to school, but school leadership is one of them.

Children know the difference between good, mediocre and poor principals as do parents, and teachers.

North Otago has recent examples where one principal left the school doing very well, the next dragged it down and his replacement has had to work very hard to bring it up again.

If a principal, and union head, doesn’t recognise that not all principals are equally good, he’s part of the problem.

And given the issue is political, shouldn’t the fact that he was a Labour Party candidate be mentioned?

Teachers or truancy ads?

The government is considering cutting 3000 senior teaching roles  from its budget:

In a surprise move, the government wants to cut a senior teaching role nationwide so it can cover a hole in its budget.

It wants to let 3119 fixed-term “within-school teacher” contracts expire so it can avoid a $12-million-a-year “funding cliff” at the end of the 2022-23 financial year.

The $8000-a-year contracts are part of the Communities of Learning/Kāhui Ako scheme which involves 1800 schools and costs more than $100m a year. . .

The roles were part of teachers’ collective agreements so the ministry must negotiate any changes with teacher unions the Educational Institute and the Post Primary Teachers’ Association.

Principals contacted by RNZ said they were not aware of the ministry’s plan and warned the within-school roles were critical to their work.

The lead principal for a Nelson Kāhui Ako, Nayland College principal Daniel Wilson, told RNZ the proposal was “very concerning”.

“We would have significant issues with continuing the Kāhui Ako in any form without the within-school-teacher positions available.

“Our WSTs act in a coaching role that is central to our strategy to improve student outcomes. This would completely fall over without these positions and the work of the Kahui Ako would have to be significantly reviewed and possibly disbanded.” . .

If cuts need to be made they should be in the growing back room bureaucracy, not on the front line where teachers are already over-stretched and under resourced:

Education is going backwards under Labour and things will only get worse if the Government cuts funding for frontline teachers, National’s Education Spokesperson Erica Stanford says.

“Labour has overseen a shocking decline in achievement and attendance. But rather than do something to turn this around, this Government wants to cut funding for senior teacher roles within Communities of Learning/Kāhui Ako.

“Literacy and numeracy achievement rates are plummeting – kids aren’t being taught to read and write. In Term 1 this year only 46 per cent of kids attended school regularly and 100,000 kids were chronically truant, meaning they missed at least three in every 10 school days.

Some of the blame for that can be placed on Covid-19 but there are other contributing factors which cutting teaching roles won’t solve.

“At the same time that Labour wants to cut funding for senior teachers on the frontline, this Government has added over 10,000 bureaucrats to the public service and the number of Ministry of Education staff earning over $120,000 has almost tripled to 955.

“Principals say the senior teacher roles are ‘central to our strategy to improve student outcomes’ and ‘highly valued’. But in typical Labour fashion, they’d rather prioritise bureaucrats in Wellington.

“Jacinda Ardern’s Government is failing a generation of kids. That’s not just a social failure – it’s a future economic crisis.”

There’s plenty to criticise this government for. Education failures are among the most serious and not just for the pupils.

Children, who attend school sporadically if at all,  who don’t get an adequate grounding in literacy and numeracy if and when they’re there, will be adults who won’t be able to do the work that will provide them with fulfilling lives and that the country will need.

The government has, belatedly, decided to do something about the high truancy rates but like so much it does its questionable whether it will be effective.

It’s launched an advertising campaign in newspapers, and on radio and television encouraging children back to school.

How many parents whose children aren’t going to school, and how many children who are truanting will take notice of the campaign, if they even notice it?

It would be far better to spend the money helping schools deal with the truants themselves and helping teachers help the children who are failing and being failed.

Rural round-up

Ministry accused of stealing Taihape farm – Phil Pennington:

Government officials are being accused of stealing a farm bought by a central North Island town for their schoolchildren to learn agriculture.

Taihape people established the teaching farm on 12 hectares next to Taihape College 30 years ago but the Ministry of Education has taken it and put it in the landbank for Treaty settlements, and the school can now only lease it.

The Ombudsman is looking at whether to investigate.

“It’s very unfortunate. I think you could effectively say that the community asset has been stolen by the Education Ministry,” Rangitīkei National MP Ian McKelvie said. . .

New tax rules are flawed – Neal Wallace;

New taxation rules will create uncertainty and compliance costs to virtually every farm sales, warns Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand (CA ANZ).

The association’s NZ tax leader John Cuthbertson says the new legislation coming into force on July 1, is designed to reduce government revenue loss by forcing parties to sale and purchase agreements to agree on the allocation of sale proceeds to particular types of assets for tax purposes.

Cuthbertson says this is known as purchase price allocation.

“If they had just stopped there that would have been acceptable, but they have gone further, impacting the relative negotiating positions of the parties and adding uncertainty and compliance costs,” he said. . . 

Getting the last of the wheat off, beautiful hot nor'wester for it. pic.twitter.com/FOcqItC4a0

— Blocka 🧢 (@blairdrysdale77) March 14, 2021

A change for the better – Ross Nolly:

A Taranaki farmer has turned his entire farming operation 180 degrees and is loving the change.

When farmers change their farm system, it’s often just a case of making minor changes to streamline the operation. However, when Taranaki farmers Adam and Taryn Pearce decided to make changes they didn’t do things by halves.

The Pearces operate a 60-hectare, 180-cow farm at Lepperton. When they decided to change their farming system, it was not going to be just a small tweak for them to achieve that goal. . .

Few takers for safety subsidy – Country Life:

Of the 35,000 farmers and businesses eligible to access a subsidy for crush protection devices for quad bikes, only 270 have taken it up.

ACC injury prevention manager Virginia Burton-Konia says agriculture is a high risk area and quad bikes create significant costs to the scheme and therefore significant injuries for farm workers.

She says it’s not just farmers, but sometimes farm workers, whānau or manuhiri who are on farms.

“Last year ended up with $80 million worth of cost to the scheme focusing on injuries in quad bikes, you know we ended up with 566 I think injuries in 2020.” . .

A side hustle in saffron – Country LIfe:

Haley Heathwaite was looking for something “a bit different and a challenge” when deciding on a crop of her own to grow.

The former outdoor instructor is production manager with a Gisborne seed company and for the past four years she has also had a side gig growing saffron on eight hectares in Tolaga Bay.

The precious spice comes from the stigma of the crocus sativus – a pretty purple flower which blooms for just a few weeks in the autumn – and Haley says it sells for $57,000 a kilo at the moment. The painstaking autumn harvest is, however, counted in grams.

Haley says there are many challenges extracting the brightly coloured stigma during harvest including keeping bees away and dealing with morning dew. . . 

Sunrise in Vacy this morning and due to daylight saving all Air Ibis flights were grounded till after 7am pic.twitter.com/XM5qX1gwYb

— David Williams (@david_vacy) March 10, 2021

Location not size fuel reduction burns most effective within 1km of houses – Jamieson Murphy:

LOCATION is far more important that size when it comes to fuel reduction burns, a new study by the Bushfire Recovery Project has found.

The expert review of 72 peer-reviewed scientific papers about bushfires and infrastructure loss found fuel reduction burning was most effective at reducing housing loss when done within one kilometre of the property.

The Bushfire Recovery Project is a joint initiative between Griffith University and the Australian National University to inform the public about what the peer-reviewed science says about bushfires. . .

 

Rural round-up

Meat industry pans climate-change teaching resource that recommends cutting meat, dairy – Dubby Henry:

A recommendation that students eat less meat and dairy to take action on climate change has raised the ire of New Zealand’s meat industry.

The new resource – Climate Change: Prepare Today, Live Well Tomorrow – is from the Ministry of Education and is aimed at Level 4 teachers teaching children aged 7-10 about climate.

Suggestions for taking action include talking more about global warming, reducing electricity use and driving and flying less.

But it’s a short blurb that suggests reducing meat and dairy intake that has riled the meat industry’s lobby group, Beef + Lamb NZ. . . 

The problem with veganuary – Jacqueline Rowarth:

As people are encouraged to take part in “Veganuary” in the New Year, Dr Jacqueline Rowarth investigates the problems with the idea of eating less meat to save the planet.

Veganuary – the northern hemisphere initiative involving becoming vegan for a month – will not solve climate change.

Becoming vegan forever will likewise do little, despite the calls to “give up meat to save the planet”. . . 

Pollination in the Carrots (Darker flowers) is progressing well. Irrigation can wait till next week. Better to let the bees crack on. 🐝🐝🥕🥕#nzarable pic.twitter.com/GXbcjQ2HZJ

— Matt McEvedy 🥝🌾🐑 (@_McEv) January 9, 2020

New Year’s Honour a family achievement for Nelson farmer and conservationist – TIm Newman:

Nelson farmer Barbara Stuart says her New Year’s Honour was a recognition for her whole family’s work for the environment.

The Cable Bay resident has been awarded the Queen’s Service Medal in the 2020 New Year’s Honours list, for services to conservation. 

Stuart said she was very privileged to receive the award, but it had been an effort made by her whole family. 

“You don’t feel you deserve it, but I sort of see it as award for the family for the work that earlier generations have done – I feel it’s a recognition of all of those things.” . .

Central Otago shearer on the benefits of Tahi Ngatahi –

Shearer Tamehana Karauria works in Central Otago. He’s one of 800 shearers, wool handlers and farmers who’ve signed up for online, video-based learning platform Tahi Ngātahi. The initiative aims to reduce workplace injuries by 30 per cent.

Tamehana first picked up the hand piece working with his family in Gisborne and has been in the industry ever since.

What’s a good week look like for you?

As long as the sun’s shining, the sheep are dry and we’re at work, I’m in my happy place.

How does Tahi Ngātahi work?

It is all done through the Tahi Ngātahi website. You watch the videos and answer the questions. Some of the questions can be tricky, so you’ve got to watch the videos properly. . . 

Forestry investment far from straight forward venture – Scott Mason:

As forest fires, and climate change debate, rage across the Tasman (and our thoughts and best wishes go out to our Australian cousins), the topic of forestry in NZ has arisen over the Christmas break.

Most of the barbecue conversations have been quite generic, for example focusing on what the true impact of the planting of a billion new trees will have on our ecosystem as we strive towards addressing our carbon neutrality goals via a massive carbon sink consuming hundreds of thousands of acres, whether intense forestation of otherwise productive land will have a material negative cash-flow consequence for NZ in the short term (e.g. milk sells annually, trees are harvested every 25 years or so), and whether the regularity of forest fires in NZ will also increase as we experience forestation and climate change.

We even debated the concept of farming carbon credits, versus (or to exclusion of caring about) wood, and the long-term impacts that could have on good forestry management. . . 

Love finishing milking at this time of night. Hashtag no filter etc etc.
Goodnight from the girls in Taradise! pic.twitter.com/45taZreRrt

— Matthew Herbert (@m_herbert) January 8, 2020

What will happen with dairy markets in 2020? – Chris Gooderham:

Despite the uncertainty in 2019, the market value of milk in the UK was the most stable it’s been for a decade. But as we enter the next decade, how long will that stability last? We take a look at the key dynamics that are playing out in the dairy markets at the moment.

Globally:

• Global milk production is set to grow by just 1% in 2020. The majority of the additional milk is expected to come from the US and EU. Australian production has been declining as it struggles with impacts of record high temperatures and drought, and the recent widespread bush fires. Growth in New Zealand production is expected to be relatively flat.
• Global dairy demand is forecast to rise by 2.1% for fresh product and 1.5% per annum for processed products, according to the latest FAO-OECD predictions. Demand may however be impacted by a slowdown in economic growth over the coming year, particularly from the oil rich countries who are large importers of dairy. . .

 

Need right response

Climate change agitation started on the left.

Some of it was driven by genuine concern for the environment. Some had, and still has, a wider anti-capitalist political agenda.

Climate change is now an issue that spans the political spectrum but most response is still shaped by the left with its usual recipe of less of this here and more tax on that there.

Ironically, given climate change activists’ demands to accept the science, a lot of the response does not follow the science.

Much of the response is also simplistic and does not take into account all the costs and consequences of prescribed actions nor does it follow the prescription for sustainability which requires a balance of economic, environmental and social concerns.

The teaching resource on climate change issued by the Ministry of Education exemplifies this, mixing misinformation and preaching with the science and teaching.

There is a huge opportunity here for the right to promote a much more positive response that will counter the eco-pessimism and provide real solutions with technology and innovation.

That is what has provided answers to problems that have beset the world in the past and that is what is needed if we’re to safeguard the health of the planet for the future.

School closure investigation overdue

Chief Ombudsman Dame Beverly waken is investigating the way in which the Ministry of Education conducts consultation on school closures and mergers.

. . . Dame Beverley will be looking in some detail at a number of closure and merger consultations carried out in recent years, including the process that is currently underway in Christchurch

“I will assess whether the consultation processes operate in a manner that adequately ensures fair and meaningful participation by affected parties and, if they do not, how they could be improved”, says Dame Beverley. . .

Such an investigation is long overdue.

School mergers and closures are always fraught and the Ministry has been handling them poorly for years.

North Otago was one of the areas into which then Minister of Education Trevor Mallard strode in clodhopper boots demanding mergers and closures nearly 10 years ago.

There was little if any consultation and very poor understanding of communities of interest and other factors which ought to have been considered.

The Minister got the blame and three MPs who lost their seats in the south – Mark Peck in Invercargill, David Parker in Otago and Jim Sutton in Aoraki – could lay some of the responsibility on this issue.

But then, as now, most of the blame ought to have been laid at the Ministry’s door.

It didn’t learn from the mistakes made before the 2005 election and repeated them with bells on in Christchurch where even more sensitivity was required.

Changes in population result in changing educational needs. New Schools will be needed in areas of growth, old ones will need to close or merge in areas of decline.

Handling that is core Ministry business for which it ought to follow best practice. Instead it appears to follow the process which didn’t work nearly a decade ago and from which it seems to have learned nothing.

I wish Dame Beverley well in her investigation and hope her findings lead to much needed improvements for the sake of schools, pupils, staff and their communities.

Is it good enough?

New Zealand’s education system isn’t world class.

This is the opinion of Ministry of Education chief executive, Lesley Longstone.

[She] wrote in the ministry’s annual report that New Zealand cannot claim to be world class because Maori and Pasifika children and children from poor communities are underperforming. . .

Not surprisingly teacher unions have gone on the defensive but they’re missing the point.

It doesn’t matter how our education system ranks in the world, what matters is whether it’s good enough.

When one in five leave school without basic literacy and numeracy skills and some students who get to university need remedial help it’s not.

The blame for that can’t all be laid on the system or teachers.

If children get to school without pre-reading skills, shift schools often, have insufficient encouragement and support from home and/or don’t have enough food or sleep the best of teachers will struggle to make a difference.

But some children make good progress in spite of the disadvantages they face while others don’t.

What makes the difference?

If the education system was as good as it needs to be it would not only know the answer to that question but how to apply what makes the difference where it’s lacking.

 

 

They’ve had time

Radio NZ reports the Ministry of Education has appointed a specialist advisor to Pembroke School in Oamaru to make sure national standards are implemented.

All schools have been given plenty of time to do what’s required.

If they can’t/won’t implement the standards themselves then the Ministry is correct to appoint people who will.

School “forced” to obey law

The headline in the Oamaru Mail (not online) says: Govt ‘bullies school’.

The story says:

Oamaru’s Pembroke School has been forced to include the controversial National Standards in its charter.

Pembroke principal Brent Godfery said yesterday the Ministry of Education had used the Education Act to make the school’s board of trustees amend the charter so it complies.

Shock, horror – the Ministry used the law to bring into line a school which was deliberately flouting it.

. . .  Mr Godfery said just because charters were compliant it did not mean the National Standards were acted upon.

“We will continue to educate our community on the dangers this policy is posing to one of the best educations systems in the world,” he said.

Schools are supposed to be educating its pupils not pushing a political point of view at its community.

No-one denies that our system is very good and that our best students are up with the world’s best. The problem is the long tail of low achievers among whom are the one in five who leave school with illiterate and innumerate.

National Standards won’t by themselves change that but they are a tool which will help identify the children who aren’t learning as well as they ought to be.

However, from what Mr Godfery told the Waitaki Herald,  it isn’t how well pupils are learning but how the school looks which is his main concern:

Like other principals, Mr Godfery was concerned that National Standards’ results would be turned into a league table, ranking schools against each other.

He said such tables weren’t a fair reflection on how schools performed compared to others, due to different decile ratings for schools and pupils who came from non-English speaking backgrounds.

This is the same tired argument too often used to oppose all sorts of innovations in schools and one which is of far more concern to teachers than anyone else.

It might be possible to compare schools as a by-product of National Standards but that’s not its aim. They are simply a tool to monitor children’s performance and progress to ensure teachers and parents know how well children are doing.

Success or failure of the tool won’t be in identifying children who don’t meet the standard but in what happens next to help those who aren’t learning as well as they ought to be.

No guns at school

Hampden School in North Otago is reviewing its decision to allow children to bring guns to school. That’s homemade guns which were used while the children played at pig hunting while supervised by teachers.

Board chairman Ian Carter said, when contacted, the idea came from pupils who went pig hunting with their parents at weekends.

The Ministry of Education does not support children taking toy guns to school. Schools are self-managing and responsible for the day-to-day management of curriculum and play.

“We will continue to work closely with the school to ensure it meets its obligations of providing a safe physical and emotional environment for all students,” ministry southern regional manager Michael De’Ath said.

Mr Carter said the children’s request was discussed by board members, who thought it was pro-active in a rural environment where children were exposed to guns.

Three or four pupils made their own hand-crafted guns – no imitation guns were to be brought to school – and a small group played on Wednesdays in bush in the playground, supervised by teachers.

Children took turns to play the pig, with other children playing dogs who were “released” to catch the pig, Mr Carter said.

It was “purely a game” which was supervised and in a specified area and the children knew it was only once a week, he said. The board believed it had acted responsibly.

The school had also reinstated tackle rugby at the request of pupils. Board members felt the activities were meeting the needs of boys at the school “wanting that rough and tumble”.

Mr Carter accepted it was not something that should be widespread throughout the country and it was up to individual schools to make that judgement. He had had no negative feedback from parents or the community, he said.

I can understand why the Ministry might have some reservations, but fire arms are part of rural life and play like this is an opportunity to learn about fire arm safety while having fun. Country kids should be able to play country games.