NZ Herald on charter schools

September 20th, 2013 at 2:00 pm by David Farrar

The editorials:

Initially it was going to fund – or “partnership schools” as it prefers – only in disadvantaged areas of South Auckland and Christchurch. But when applications were invited and evaluated, Education Minister Hekia Parata was sufficiently impressed to widen the pilot. This week, she and Act leader John Banks announced five applications had been accepted for schools in Northland and Albany as well as in South Auckland.

It is no surprise that three of the five are Maori initiatives, one in Whangarei proposed by the He Puna Marama Charitable Trust, one in Whangaruru by the Nga Parirau Matauranga Trust and one from the Rise Up Trust in Mangere. 

Charter schools in the United States have attracted most interest from minorities who feel mainstream education is failing them.

And in some states like New Orleans and DC, they have had a significant positive impact.

The schools will be obliged to teach the national curriculum which, thanks largely to Labour governments, is not very prescriptive about what is taught. They will want qualified teachers and the information they must supply for their state funding will surely be available. Labour’s and the unions’ real objection to charter schools is one of principle and power.

Equality in education, they believe, requires not only state funding but state management of schools, as well as state control of teacher training and, not least from the union’s point of view, national bargaining over teachers’ pay and terms of employment. Even in the US, teachers’ unions still fiercely oppose charter schools.

For much the same reasons – their grip on power is loosened.

As in the US, charter schools’ futures will depend on their educational ideas producing the desired results. These schools are just an extension of the idea that diversity is healthy, choice is fair and an element of competition never did a public service much harm. This can now be put to the test.

These schools will be under intense scrutiny for their use of public money. If they work, even for a small number of students, that money will have been well spent.

Yep. We should judge them on their results. They can get closed down (unlike a public school) if they fail to perform.

Tags: , ,

72 Responses to “NZ Herald on charter schools”

  1. Graeme Edgeler (3,267 comments) says:

    And in some states like New Orleans and DC, they have had a significant positive impact.

    Neither New Orleans nor DC is a state.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Bill Courtney (143 comments) says:

    This is pathetic blogging. Charter school supporters must be bitterly disappointed at what has been approved. All 5 schools at capacity would still fit inside one large South Auckland primary school. And who gets the cash? $19m to fund the ideology and only $27m announced last week by Hekia to support the tens of thousands of kids who come from disadvantaged backgrounds and who really need our help. And a lot of that was for existing initiatives anyway!

    And Farrar has never held the Working Group chaired by Catherine Isaac accountable for failing to deliver any report, advice or recommendations in writing to her sponsoring Minister, John Banks. But don’t worry, Catherine, John signed off on the cheque for $33,890.31 (incl. expenses).

    Why do people who trade on “greater accountability” never get held to account themselves?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 24 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. queenstfarmer (748 comments) says:

    Gee, Bill Courtney, you forgot to include the URL for your blog so you can show us all how it’s done.

    I agree with the Herald editorial this on this occassion “Editorial: Charter trial success will be money well spent”.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. dime (9,470 comments) says:

    Dime donates quite a lot to various schools throughout the year. Prizes for fund raising and the like.

    Dime wont be following the spiteful, nasty teacher unions and will make sure he donates to charter schools as well as public. Just saying :D

    Anyway, I keep hearing 19 million. How does that figure come about? do the just transfer the funding per kid to the new school? or is there extra in there as well?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    I am surprised the National Party is that into charter schools.

    “Judge them on their results” Go for it. A military academy, church in South Auckland, middle school that doesn’t offer NCEA and a couple of Kura in the North are hardly going to have good results.

    Then hopefully the supporters of charter schools are consistent with their arguments – Poor results = shut down.

    It is such a shame vulnerable students are the guinea pigs of this Far Right experiment.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 1 Thumb down 26 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Mark Thomson (85 comments) says:

    Good article out today from the NZ Initiative looking at the performance of inexperienced teachers who have not gone through the conventional training process – http://bit.ly/15aaahQ

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. dime (9,470 comments) says:

    “It is such a shame vulnerable students are the political pawns of the far left teacher unions”

    Fixed it for ya commie

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    @dime – you don’t think research by the Business Round Table, sorry NZ Initiative, might be a little biased?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 2 Thumb down 24 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Than (425 comments) says:

    It is such a shame vulnerable students are the guinea pigs of this Far Right experiment.

    No parents are being forced to send their children to a charter school, nor will they be forced to stay if they find it unsatisfactory. Public schools have lost no funds or resources, and every parent can still send their children to one if they want.

    The hysterical scaremongering from the teacher’s unions is nothing about the welfare of children. It is pure selfish patch protection.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Redbaiter (7,642 comments) says:

    “It is such a shame vulnerable students are the guinea pigs of this Far Right experiment.”

    You communist idiot, nobody on the “far right” should be happy with this weak and ineffective compromise. (typical of John “all talk no do” Banks.)

    If the far right were at work education would be completely privatised. As it should be.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Cato (1,094 comments) says:

    “Neither New Orleans nor DC is a state.”

    Do you know, when I read that, I thought to myself, “I wonder if Graeme Edgeler will write a pedantic comment addressing nothing of substance but nitpicking the incorrect form of territorial designation used by DPF here.”

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. dime (9,470 comments) says:

    Samuel – you suggest we go with the teacher unions cherry picked research instead?

    Id have more respect for your cause if you were just honest.

    “we are trying to protect ourselves as workers”

    but ah no, its all about the children! wont somebody think of the children wah wah wah

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. gazzmaniac (2,317 comments) says:

    Why would the Business Round Table have any interest at all in charter schools?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Rightandleft (638 comments) says:

    The research on charter schools in the US are only comparing charter schools there to public American schools. Our public schools already act like many American charters. As I’ve said before our schools already are charters by the US definition used in their research. So saying New Orleans charter schools outperformed their local public counterparts is no reason to think partnership charter schools in NZ will outperform Tomorrow’s Schools charter schools.

    Studies in the US have found that states with more loosely monitored versions of charter schools perform worse than more carefully regulated ones. Essentially the choice we are being offered is not between centrally controlled bureaucratic public schools and free-market charter schools (that’s the choice in the US) but a choice between our currently tightly regulated charter system or a more loosely regulated system.

    I can’t see the advantage in removing protections from the current system, one which already allows for significantly more parent choice than exists anywhere in the US public system. We already have the local community control, adaptability and competition that charters brought to the US, so why take a gamble with a model of charters shown to have much higher risks and little evidence of better outcomes?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. PaulL (5,875 comments) says:

    @RightandLeft. You are correct, you’ve said that many times. And the answer remains the same. The US is different, so any research from there is not directly relevant to the NZ situation. As with research in any other country. So we can either say “we don’t want to change our system”, or we can run a trial and get evidence that is directly relevant to the NZ situation.

    You appear to be saying “I’ve already decided it’s unlikely to work, so I think we shouldn’t run the trial.” Most on here don’t support that position, we think that the trial has a small cost, only involves children whose parents opt in, and has little likelihood of generating materially worse outcomes for those children. It does, however, have a potential (however small) to point us to an arrangement that offers more flexibility and choice, and that therefore could produce better outcomes for children. On that basis, I support it as a reasonable step so as to get NZ-specific information.

    In short, your argument is an interesting observation, but not a reason to stop the trial.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. OneTrack (2,619 comments) says:

    “It is such a shame vulnerable students are the guinea pigs of this Far Right experiment.”

    You mean compared to the far-left experiment that public schools have turned into. What is the public school curriculum these days because maths , reading and writing don’t appear to be high on the list of priorities? Whole classes being completely disrupted because one or two thugs in training are unable to be disciplined. Because that would be “mwean”.

    Samuel Smith, you guys are really shit-scared these things are going to succeed aren’t you. If you really thought we had the “best” (best for who??) then you wouldn’t be worried. Same as National Standards – you guys didn’t want anybody to realise kids were falling below the line because that might challenge your ideology. Oh no.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. OneTrack (2,619 comments) says:

    “Why would the Business Round Table have any interest at all in charter schools?”

    Because when left-wingers start raving, it doesn’t take long before they get to the Business Round Table, Tories and Neo-Libs. It doesn’t need to make any sense.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Ross12 (1,154 comments) says:

    Maybe , instead of looking at the the USA the critics should at the UK Academy system

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academies_Act_2010

    It seems to be thriving over there, despite the intitial crticism of the Act.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. OneTrack (2,619 comments) says:

    RightandLeft – “I can’t see the advantage in …”

    Yeah but the parents of the kids who will go to these schools might see some advantage. But who cares about them right….

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. BeaB (2,060 comments) says:

    We Kiwis have survived quite well being guinea pigs, going back even further than School Cert and 6FC and New Maths and Reading Recovery and self-managing schools and integration and…I could go on for ages.
    Most changes were fiercely opposed by the teaching unions and decried as the end of state education – and civilisation as we know it..
    I can remember a PPTA propagandist telling us Tomorrow’s Schools was a plot to get rid of girls’ schools. That didn’t work then.
    The same tired old arguments are trotted out every time for every new idea.
    I am amazed anyone gives them any credence at all.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. nasska (10,689 comments) says:

    No one is being forced to send their kids to a charter school & less will be compelled to leave them there if the experiment doesn’t live up to expectations. It is my fervent hope that the schools succeed & the bullying teachers’ unions that are the refuge of no hoping, menopausal, social engineers are smashed.

    The benefits of that alone will make any expenditure on charter schools a worthwhile investment.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    I am surprised the National Party is that into charter schools.

    So true. The Tories don’t normally bend over backwards to help Maori and Pacifika. There must be extreme Right wing ideology involved here.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Redbaiter (7,642 comments) says:

    “No one is being forced to send their kids to a charter school & less will be compelled to leave them there if the experiment doesn’t live up to expectations.”

    Can you translate that into English? If they’re not forced why are they compelled?

    “It is my blah blah hope that the blah blah teachers’ unions blah blah are smashed.”

    They won’t be by this pissant compromise, and if Labour gets back in (highly likely given National’s political incoherency and inarticulateness), that will be that.

    There is no real answer to left wing thugs controlling education other than fully privatising schools and universities.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Labour will put an end to ACT’s ideological burp. As David Cunliffe has said:

    “The idea that public funds will be used to fund schools which neither teach the curriculum nor employ … fully qualified staff nor are subject to the [Official Information Act] is barking mad and we will not have it.”

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. RightNow (6,676 comments) says:

    Bill Courtney (86) Says:
    “$19m to fund the ideology and only $27m announced last week by Hekia to support the tens of thousands of kids who come from disadvantaged backgrounds and who really need our help. And a lot of that was for existing initiatives anyway!”

    In other words the $27m is in addition to existing spending. Talk about pathetic blogging, why don’t you tell us how much this is in addition to?

    If you’re so concerned about value for taxpayer’s money I guess you must really love private schools, since they contribute more in tax revenue than they get in subsidies.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Psycho Milt (2,269 comments) says:

    Yep. We should judge them on their results. They can get closed down (unlike a public school) if they fail to perform.

    If a single one of those schools can’t game its results to appear hugely better than public equivalents, it really would deserve to be closed down for incompetence. Also: the news that public schools can’t be closed down will come as a great surprise to parents whose kids were at public schools that have been closed down.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    If the Far Right are so keen on charter schools, why don’t they fund them?

    Pass the hat round the next ACT conference or Business Round Table meeting.

    Not so keen now? Didn’t think so. Snouts in the trough again.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. RightNow (6,676 comments) says:

    “Labour will put an end to ACT’s ideological burp”

    To be honest I would hope if Labour get near the reigns again that they do axe charter schools or we’d probably end up with hip-hop academies.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. RightNow (6,676 comments) says:

    “If the Far Right are so keen on charter schools, why don’t they fund them?”

    You think lefties pay net tax?

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. scrubone (3,050 comments) says:

    “Judge them on their results” Go for it. A military academy, church in South Auckland, middle school that doesn’t offer NCEA and a couple of Kura in the North are hardly going to have good results.

    Er, the fact you try to describe them in negative terms has no bearing on their actual success. Why on earth would it?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Rightandleft (638 comments) says:

    If you’ve read my other posts you’ll know I’m not opposed to national standards and I’m no supporter of social engineering or most leftist ideas. I like that our schools are locally controlled and compete and that parents have choice in where to send their kids. I oppose these ‘partnership’ charters because they remove the local accountability a board of trustees offers and they have a lack of accountability for how they spend public money. Every one of the schools chosen for this experiment could have been created under the old system as special character schools. So what does the new legislation do? Basically it removes zoning and makes them bulk funded. That’s not really a radical new experiment at all. It’s a return to the 1990s, when that was tried at many schools across NZ.

    I also believe the movement to support them is based on an imaginary problem, that our public schools as they exist are failing a large number of students. The NCEA results over the last decade have shown constant improvements for all groups. The whole 1 in 5 failing stat is completely made up with no research to back it.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. PaulL (5,875 comments) says:

    @RightandLeft: you are questioning the rationale for starting these schools. That is not the same thing as a reason to not start them. The simple point here is that some people think they might be better. You disagree. Is that a reason to deny the trial?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    Oink oink – more snouts in the trough.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Ross12 (1,154 comments) says:

    Rightandleft

    ” The whole 1 in 5 failing stat is completely made up with no research to back it”
    Whether it is 20% or 15% etc does not really matter. When you have employers screaming out that young employees can not do basic maths or write a proper sentence , something is wrong and it has to be addressed ,somehow. I heard Tim Fowkes (sp ?) on the radio yesterday saying if there is a problem why not just give existing schools more resources to handle it — well this problem has not come along in the last few years , it has been around for decades. Plenty of money is added to the education budget every year and the problem still exists. So new ways have to be looked at and this trial is trying to do that.

    With regard the military academy. A lady rang up on Tim’s show and said her son had gone through their school. He was a ” layabout young teenager” starting to get into trouble and not doing well at school. After a few years at the Academy he got very fit , improved his discipline , passed NCEA 1 and left to get an apprenticeship. He is now qualified and has a full time job. What is wrong with that ?? ( You could certainly hear the pride in the mother’s voice)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    Ross12 – I think you’ll find your success example is sourced from the current system, not a charter school opening in 2014.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. NK (1,072 comments) says:

    If you think a Charter School is not right for your child, don’t send your children to one.

    If your concern is for other children being taught at them (i.e. not your own), what business is it of yours how other people choose to educate their children?

    I can’t believe all these socialists worrying themselves about other people’s lives…..oh, hang on……………

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Ross12 (1,154 comments) says:

    Samuel Smith

    The current system has not helped your reading skills. I specifically mention the the Military Academy that people like you are slagging off.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Redbaiter (7,642 comments) says:

    Sam Smith is just a dirty little commie tyrant who if it was in his power would be sending all those who want charter schools to re-education camps.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    Ross12 – Yes, the Military Academy operating within the current system as many do. The NZ education system is already quite varied: state, state integrated, private, special character, kura, co-ed, single-sex.

    What makes charter schools different? Can you not join the dots? ACT party – Public education – so-called disadvantaged groups.

    Knock, knock, anyone home?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Than (425 comments) says:

    If a single one of those schools can’t game its results to appear hugely better than public equivalents, it really would deserve to be closed down for incompetence.

    I love the way the so many excuses have already appeared before the first Charter school even opens. Charter Schools will be a failure – Labour and the Ministry of Truth have declared it so, and all evidence to the contrary must be wrong.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. scrubone (3,050 comments) says:

    Ross12 – Yes, the Military Academy operating within the current system as many do. The NZ education system is already quite varied: state, state integrated, private, special character, kura, co-ed, single-sex.

    What makes charter schools different?

    The state pays, meaning that those who otherwise would not be able to afford them, but would benefit from the nature of the school now can.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. NK (1,072 comments) says:

    Just joining the dots ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

    I can’t see anything at the end.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. scrubone (3,050 comments) says:

    A military academy, church in South Auckland, middle school that doesn’t offer NCEA and a couple of Kura in the North are hardly going to have good results.

    .

    Ross12 – Yes, the Military Academy operating within the current system as many do. The NZ education system is already quite varied: state, state integrated, private, special character, kura, co-ed, single-sex.

    You criticized the military school because it would “hardly have good results”. Now, when it’s been pointed out that it does in fact have good results, you claim those results are the product of the current system.

    So what exactly is your real, factually-based objection to charter schools?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. PaulL (5,875 comments) says:

    @Samuel Smith: your belief that the ACT party, and the right in general, don’t care about the disadvantaged tells us more about you than it does about the right.

    You would recall that Roger Douglas was one of the founders of ACT. And that he represented a very deprived electorate. And perhaps, you’d even recall him being very clear that the gutting of corporate welfare and protectionism that he helped drive in the 80s mostly helped the poor to the disadvantage of the wealthy.

    The fact that the right has in mind a different means does not mean that the ends they want are dramatically different. The right would absolutely like those currently on benefits or currently not contributing to society to have the means and ability to contribute more fully (and no, that doesn’t just mean in a monetary sense). They just don’t believe increasing benefits and subsidising laziness is necessarily the right way.

    Similarly with schooling, the right absolutely want those at the tail end to get the education they need to be successful in life. They just don’t necessarily believe that is best delivered through one-size-fits-all education systems, nor through provision of services in a union dominated sector that seems to put the needs of teachers ahead of the needs of students.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. doggone7 (705 comments) says:

    Charter schools take a bow! Already there has been a profound impact by their establishment.

    So many who have been stridently opposed to Maori being given money to help their own people have risen to support money being given to set up their own schools. Wonders will never cease.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Reid (15,970 comments) says:

    There is nothing so vigorously defended as a vested interest disguised as an intellectual conviction.

    Once again this truism plays itself out in this as in many many other fields as the vested interests in the educational status quo vigorously defend their power base using arguments posing as intellectual convictions.

    The same vested interests are doing precisely the same thing with the National Standards and the palpably hated “league tables.”

    But in respect of this, all one needs to do to answer them is question why they never ever talk about the failings of the present system which litters society like so much flotsam and jetsam, having taken walking talking power houses of spiritual magnificence at the age of five and largely turned them not into well-rounded highly disciplined dedicated and caring individuals at 17 but rather into, well, you tell me what you see from their output. Does anyone think it’s “simply the best, better than all the rest?”

    But they never talk about that, do they.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. itstricky (1,579 comments) says:

    If your concern is for other children being taught at them (i.e. not your own), what business is it of yours how other people choose to educate their children?

    Is it not your concern if Government funds (i.e. the woeful burden of tax, oh my life is so hard) are used to teach and pay for things outside what you believe in or are willing to support?

    I thought the straight faced, careful shoe-lace tying, regimented, good, honest, I-pay-so-much-tax-my-belly-hurts citizens of KB aren’t worrying themselves sick about that and getting all over it like a rash.

    Rather destroy teacher’s unions instead? Yeah I guess, that’s probably worth the small outlay of tax payer’s money to give it a go.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. scrubone (3,050 comments) says:

    Is it not your concern if Government funds are used to teach and pay for things outside what you believe in or are willing to support?

    I’m reminded of the person who yesterday said he didn’t want evangelicals teaching children. I’m sure, if pressed, he’d probably say the same about Catholics (they’re all child molesters don’t you know?) and anyone who’s ok with child molesting of any sort (so, no Dawkins supporters).

    Which leaves you with Muslims, Hindus, and agnostics I think.

    See the problem?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    OK, so the Military Academy under the current system attracts students and gets good results. Tell you anything?

    Maybe schools like Mt Hobson, military academies and kura already exist.

    So what is different about charter schools? – ACT – No one smell a rat?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. cha (3,779 comments) says:

    See the problem?

    I’m looking forward to the arrival of Fethullah Gülen’s mob.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    Red – Obama wasn’t born in the USA – baiter !!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. PaulL (5,875 comments) says:

    @Samuel Smith: you’re being too obscure. What rat are we supposed to be smelling?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    @PaulL – The fact that NZ already has a top-performing education system, elected school boards, and more choice than any other country I can think of. But wait, along comes a Far Right party with 1% of the vote talking about how they are going to help Maori and Pasifika students in Christchurch and South Auckland.

    How many votes do you think the ACT party got in Christchurch and South Auckland?

    Do you really think the ACT party represent Maori and Pasifika students in Christchurch and South Auckland?

    Did ACT simply forget to campaign on charter schools platform?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. PaulL (5,875 comments) says:

    @Samuel Smith: I think you’ll find it’s been in ACT’s platform since the 90s. And if you think that voters outside those areas don’t care about low achievement rates in our schools, and the consequent wasted potential across NZ, then your left wing blinkers are blinding you to the real concerns of many on the right.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    @PaulL – vouchers have been ACT policy since the 1990s. Charter schools were never mentioned until after the 2011 election.

    I don’t believe the ACT party cares about poor people. Your’e a fool if you think they do.

    If Maori and Pasifika wanted charter schools, they would have asked for them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. doggone7 (705 comments) says:

    Samuel Smith

    ACT has always sought to privatise schools. Getting the foot in the door is the critical step not whether it’s Christchurch or South Auckland. After the next election Mr Banks will be after more but I can’t see it happening in Epsom.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    doggone7 – I think you’ll find Banks struggles to get re-elected.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. PaulL (5,875 comments) says:

    @Samuel Smith: I do believe that ACT care about poor people. Your assessment of me as a fool I’ll consider in light of your demonstrably weak logic skills over the last few days on these threads.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Than (425 comments) says:

    Samuel, you seem obsessed with the fact that Charter schools are an ACT policy. Would you care to actually comment (or, god forbid, offer factual evidence) on the schools themselves?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Ross12 (1,154 comments) says:

    Samuel Smith

    OK joining the dots for you. The Military Academy school has been successful and is now going to use the charter school setup to gain extra funding to expand on its success. Simple.
    You should forget your hang up on the Act party and use of the term “Charter School” and think of the kids for once.
    It is case here of not having a ” one size fits all” in terms of educating kids. Some will do better in different environments.
    The military academy school is just one example.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    And why does the Military Academy simply not expand under the current provisions for special character schools?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. dime (9,470 comments) says:

    “If Maori and Pasifika wanted charter schools, they would have asked for them.”

    Lol I guess that’s why there are no Maori or pi charter schools in the works..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. NK (1,072 comments) says:

    I don’t believe the ACT party cares about poor people. Your’e a fool if you think they do.

    ACT doesn’t care about wealthy people. Wealthy people can take care of themselves. As an ACT member since 1997, I can tell you most ACT members couldn’t give a stuff about the rich; their focus is making more people like them, particularly the poor. If we have more people who are wealthy, and less reliant on the State, then the country is better off, particularly the poor.

    It’s bloody simple. That’s why ACT focuses on wealth creation, and why the Left tend to focus on wealth distribution. After being around this stuff for 16 years, I can confidently say that it’s the Left that don’t give two stuffs about the poor. If they cared about the poor, they would focus on making them wealthy. Instead all they focus on is giving them free stuff after taking it off others.

    I think most ACT people know what makes people wealthy and successful, and all they are interested in is trying to impart those philosophies on others: Hard work, thrift, personal responsibility and choice are starters.

    They’re not hate philosophies.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    I think you will find that no one stands against hard work, thrift, personal responsibility or choice. Pleasant buzz words.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. double d (225 comments) says:

    great comment Nick.

    mikenmild – no-one would be against hard work, thrift, etc NOT TRUE there are some who are Ok with those principles as long as it isn’t them doing it. And that is where the system fails as many have been disincentivised and it is easier to take a welfare cheque than work.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    NK – Interesting to know someone still thinks trickle-down could work, despite truckloads of evidence to the contrary.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. OneTrack (2,619 comments) says:

    Samuel Smith -still quoting the lefty slogans I see – A true ideologue. The party will be happy.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Samuel Smith (276 comments) says:

    Onetrack – It’s a fact. Trickle-down has failed and inequality continues to rise.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. RightNow (6,676 comments) says:

    “It’s a fact. Trickle-down expanding welfare has failed and inequality continues to rise.”

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. Ian McK (237 comments) says:

    Sam Smith is obviously in the pay of deviant PPTA (protectors of paedophiles, dysfunctional socialist indoctrinated losers, masquerading as teachers) and will be shooting his keyboard skills off trying to protect their vile operations.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. NK (1,072 comments) says:

    Trickle down has caused inequality? Well, there’s your problem straight away. Inequality is not the problem; rather it’s not having enough money that’s the problem. The two are completely different. And that just shows how displaced from reality you are and why people such as yourself make the plight of the poor worse, not better.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Ross12 (1,154 comments) says:

    So Samuel believes in the the “ambulance at the bottom of the cliff” approach.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.