Stephanie Martin at the NZ Initiative writes:

Imagine the outrage if it were revealed that our medical schools ignored scientific research in the training of doctors. Yet, when it comes to training teachers, ignoring science seems acceptable.

In Who Teaches the Teachers, a New Zealand Initiative report released this week, Michael Johnston and I demonstrate that the science of learning is almost completely absent from teacher education programmes in New Zealand.

The science of learning applies research on human memory, attention and motivation to classroom practice. It provides valuable insights into the teaching practices that would best serve our young learners. Our young people should be reaping the benefits of these insights.

Yet, they are not.

For the report, we analysed the themes of the 221 courses that contribute to teacher education programmes in New Zealand universities. Most courses had at least two themes, some as many as five.

The most common themes were core aspects of teaching: curriculum and pedagogy. That is as it should be. 

Two other themes, though, presented a striking contrast. 

The next most common theme was social justice, which was associated with 130 of the 221 courses. There is little evidence that teaching based on social justice ideology is effective. In fact, educational data suggest the opposite. In recent decades, as social justice pedagogy has become increasingly prevalent, the educational attainment of New Zealand’s young people has declined.

The least common theme was the science of learning, associated with just two courses.

Social justice pedagogy emphasises cultural differences in how students learn. On the other hand, the science of learning focuses on the ultimate biological similarity of human learning. Just as we all have hearts, livers and lungs, we also have similar perceptual, memory and attentional systems that govern our learning.

People are more alike than different in how they learn. Whatever social justice theorists may contend, there is a universal cognitive architecture underpinning human learning. Ironically, the most effective method of serving educational equality would be to use pedagogy based on scientific understanding of that architecture. 

One might wonder why universities seem reluctant to provide their teachers-in-training with the best understanding of decades of research on the science of learning. Achieving a greater focus on research-led teaching was why teacher training shifted to universities in the first place.

For the sake of our young people, we need a radical shift towards science-informed teacher education.

You can read our report here:

One can’t overstate how important this issue is. I hope the next Government looks to take action over teacher training so there is greater focus on the science of learning.

The Taxpayers’ Union revealed:

The Taxpayers’ Union can reveal that as part of the Tax Working Group appointed by Grant Robertson, and chaired by the late Michael Cullen, Treasury and IRD conducted analysis on what percentage of exempting GST from certain goods would actually be passed on to consumers.

The expert advice paper, concluded that while cuts to GST/VAT rates are passed on, exemption or multi-rate policies see just 30% of the tax relief passed on to shoppers.

The paper looked at the best available evidence and concluded: 

This research estimated that changes in the general VAT rate were on average fully passed through to consumers. However, changes in rates for specific goods and services were on average not fully passed through and had an estimated average pass through rate of approximately 30 percent.

So Treasury and IRD have said that the global evidence is that exemptions for specific goods and services only get passed on 30%.

So again this means Labour’s GST policy will see supermarkets benefit $1.54 billion and taxpayers benefit by less than $2 a week!

St Peter’s College in Epsom is the leading academic boys school in NZ with 94.2% of their 2022 LEAVERS having University Entrance*.

Instead of deciles in NZ we now have schools with an Equity Index number that shows the number of students at school with “risk factors” for non-achievement. St Peter’s in Epsom is quite low at 386. The high is Flaxmere College at 564.

For two schools that neither ethnicity or other demographics determine outcomes:

• St Joseph’s Maori Girls (EQI 516) has UE for LEAVERS at 88.9% and that ranks 9th in NZ
• Manukura (EQI 498) has UE for LEAVERS at 85.7 and that ranks 18th in NZ.

Along with St Peter’s (Epsom) St Joseph’s and Manukura are schools so many educators should be beating a path to.

Without additional comment. Below are matching girls’ school/boys’ school outside of Auckland and Wellington. The % is UE for LEAVERS. In brackets is the EQI.

• Christchurch GHS 68% (411)
• Christchurch BHS 50.8% (413)

• Napier GHS 62.6% (441)
• Napier BHS 42% (449)

• Otago GHS 61.9% (434)
• Otago BHS 53.4% (427)

• Nelson Girls 60% (431)
• Nelson College 37.5% (435)

• Palmerston North GHS 56% (435)
• Palmerston North BHS 41.8% (437)

• New Plymouth GHS 48.7% (451)
• New Plymouth BHS 32.3% (444)

• Hamilton GHS 41.9% (462)
• Hamilton BHS 40.0% (429)

• Southland GHS 45.3% (467)
• Southland BHS 26.8% (467) I said I wouldn’t comment but, they are our best rugby school in 2023

• Whangarei GHS 40.7% (465)
• Whangarei BHS 25.3% (467)

• Gisborne GHS 37.9% (490)
• Gisborne BHS 22.6% (491)

• Marlborough GHS 37.1% (453)
• Marlborough BHS 17.8% (454)

• Tauranga GC 34.4% (465)
• Tauranga BC 30.4% (453)

• Hastings GHS 21.2% (506)
• Hastings BHS 35% (506)

• Rotorua GHS 14.3% (502)
• Rotorua BHS 14.9% (525)

* Why use University Entrance? It is the most robust and aspirational of the qualifications that all schools do. The Ministry data includes UE equivalents for Cambridge and IB. It does not imply all students should go on to degree level study – but the should have the choice.

(Please email me for the full date set on every high school in NZ re L3 NCEA, UE, Retention, Progress to Degree level study … all in ranked spreadsheets. Plus system aggregates. [email protected])

Alwyn Poole
Innovative Education Consultants
Cambridge Festival of Sport
www.innovativeeducation.co.nz
www.cambridgefestivalofsport.co.nz
www.alwynpoole.substack.com
www.linkedin.com/in/alwyn-poole-16b02151

Petrol prices are now over $3 again for regular petrol. That is $1 a litre more than in 2017. Every tank is costing you around $50 more.

And no it is not just because of Putin. The combined tax take in 2017 was $1.19 and at the moment is is $1.74. And Labour is promising to increase the tax take even more.

A guest post by David Garrett:

Back in 2020 – or was it 2017? – Labour announced that it wished to reduce the prison population by 30%. While that has not quite been achieved, there has certainly been a substantial reduction in the prison population since they announced that policy – or perhaps desire is the better word. The question then becomes, “How did they achieve that?” In theory neither politicians nor anyone else can direct judges to impose shorter sentences.

In our system of government, the executive – effectively the cabinet – is theoretically separate from both the legislature – parliament – and the  judiciary. The first “separation” is to a large extent in name only; with only the rarest of exceptions MP’s from  the ruling party support whatever policy their mates in cabinet tell them to. If they don’t, their careers are lonely and short.  At best, all the rest of the members of parliament – those who are  not members of a governing party –  can do is delay and frustrate the passage of  legislation.

The second “separation” – that between the executive and the judiciary – is supposed to be sacrosanct; it is neither the executive’s nor the legislature’s role to criticize or direct the judiciary, and the judiciary ought not to be interfering in government policy or legislation. So how then did the executive – which constitutionally has nothing to do with sentencing – manage to achieve a 25% reduction in the prison population in five years?

On the face of it there are only two ways a reduction in the prison population can be achieved. The first is judges sending prisoners to jail less often in favour of community based sentences; the second is the Parole Board releasing prisoners earlier than they otherwise would have. The third way sentences can be lessened is by the appointment of “soft” judges who will avoid imprisonment whenever they can, and impose shorter sentences than ought to be the case when they must.  I am somewhat astounded that there has apparently been no investigation into how this reduction has been achieved. Let’s look at the three possibilities in turn.

In theory, no-one ought to be trying to influence judges’ sentencing; not their fellow judges, not the heads of bench, and certainly not agents of the executive. However we know that in least one case there was a blatant attempt – by the late Wira Gardiner and others – to put pressure on a Family Court judge with the intention that he gave greater weight to the views of Oranga Tamariki regarding the placement of a  Maori child. This quite rightly caused something of an outrage when it was revealed – but that was only one case.

Have there been “quiet words” in the ears of some High Court Judges urging them to imprison fewer people for shorter periods? Now I no longer rely on a New Zealand practicing certificate for my livelihood I am prepared to say this is entirely possible. The present Chief Justice Dame  Helen Winkelmann was appointed in  2019. She is well known to the profession as being a raving leftie, as was her predecessor Dame Sian Elias. Winkelmann began her legal career with a  large commercial law firm, Philips Fox, and later became a barrister sole, specializing in commercial work, insolvency, and medical disciplinary litigation. Prior to becoming a Judge, it is unlikely she ever met a criminal face to face. She would certainly never have met a tattooed gang thug.

Other than Justice Winkelmann, the judges who are “soft on crime” are well known to the profession, just as it is well known who are members of “the A team” – i.e. the more learned and able judges – as opposed to “the rest”. I wish to make it clear that I have no evidence – other than the rapid and substantial reduction in the prison population – to support a claim that Judges of the Supreme Court and/or the  Court of Appeal have attempted to influence their brothers and sisters to achieve a reduction in prisoner numbers by softer sentencing. The fact remains however  that this has happened, and in a relatively short time. The fact that the reduction followed calls by the Labour government for said reduction is unlikely to have been coincidental.

What about the Parole Board? I have only personally met one of the present Board, one Khylee Quince, formerly an undistinguished academic at AUT and said to be expert, inter alia¸ in youth justice and Maori legal issues. I encountered Ms Quince at a debate on Maori offending and imprisonment a few years ago. It quickly became clear that I was the token “rightie” on the panel; all the others were either Maori criminals – there were three of them as I recall – and a couple of left wing academics, including Ms Quince.

In discussions afterwards, Ms Quince was underwhelming in the extreme: she had no idea for example that there were, at that time, 13 people serving time in NZ jails for a second homicide, claiming that there were “about three”. I later sent her my list of repeat killers; she never gave me the courtesy of a reply.

Have the Parole Board collectively been releasing prisoners  more often and after less time served than before the Labour government came to power? Who knows? It would take a careful study – such as a Master’s thesis – to provide evidence one way or the other.  Even then, trying to establish some clear evidence would be very difficult, given the wide range of circumstances both of offenders and their offences. In other words trying to compare apples with apples over two time periods – before and after the election of the Labour government – would be very difficult.

What about influencing sentencing outcomes by way of appointment of “soft” judges? I understand there have only been about four High Court Judges appointed since Labour came to power. However, the vast majority of criminal sentencing in New Zealand is done in the District Court. I have no idea how many DCJ’s have been appointed since 2017.  Perhaps a reader with knowledge of the numbers in question could enlighten all of us.

So what do we know for sure? Firstly, we know Labour campaigned on substantially reducing the prison population, and we know this reduction has in fact occurred. Secondly, we know that the executive constitutionally has no direct  input into what the courts do, and what sentences are passed. But we also know from the Wira Gardiner Family Court case that outside interference has occurred in at least one case. We know about that one case only because the Judge in question bravely made it known to the public that he had been pressured. While that might have been an isolated case, in my view that is most unlikely. Once again, something happened by which government policy regarding prisoner numbers became a reality.In my opinion, it is  clear at least on the balance of probabiliies that some person or persons must have  influenced members of  our judiciary. In a small country like ours, it is inevitable that members of the judicial elites mix often with members of other elites, including politicians. Perhaps we will never know quite how a 25% reduction in the prison population was achieved in five years – it sure as hell wasn’t because of a 25% reduction in violent offending. We are in the middle of a crime wave, and the major legislative response to that has been to repeal the three strikes law rather than  a “beefing up” of the law as you would expect.

Newshub reports:

Labour leader Chris Hipkins is standing by one of his MPs, despite a number of former employees coming forward to Newshub calling Shanan Halbert a bully.

The Labour Party was alerted to concerns about his alleged behaviour a year ago but because staffers wanted to remain anonymous, no formal process was undertaken …

They told Newshub that Halbert was “manipulative”, “scheming”, “a narcissist” and that they live in fear of him.  …

Newshub has obtained email chains, which directly raise concerns with Labour’s former chief Whip Duncan Webb.  

The first alert came from a bullying and harassment consultant acting on behalf of some of Halbert’s former staffers.

They emailed Webb on August 22 last year and listed Halbert’s behaviour in black and white.

The email said that Halbert had made staff members “cry in front of others”, “publicly humiliated them”, “played staff off against each other”, and “shouted” at staff.  

But Labour, the “workers’ party”, did nothing.

Ipsos have published their regular issues poll for August 2023, and it is rather bleak for Labour.

The overall score for Government performance has dropped from an already low 5.2/10 in May to a 4.5/10 in August. Three years ago they were at 7.2/10.

The top issues of importance (respondents can choose up to three) are:

1. Inflation 62%
2. Crime 36%
3. Housing 32%
4. Health 31%
5. Economy 24%
6. Climate Change 21%
7. Fuel prices 21%
8. Poverty 16%
9. Education 8%
10. Taxation 7%

And who leads on each issue;

1. Inflation: National +13% (+7% from May)
2. Crime: National +16% (+6%)
3. Housing: National +11% (+8%)
4. Health: National +2% (+7%)
5. Economy: National +17% (+7%)
6. Climate Change: Greens
7. Fuel prices: National
8. Poverty: Labour
9. Education: National
10. Taxation: National

So National leads on every issue of the top five and Labour only one issue in the top 10.

National even leads on housing, health and education – areas left parties normally do better on. I guess the public do understand the lack of improved outcomes despite massive spending increases.

NZ Herald

• Claire Trevett: Luxon
• Shayne Currie: Luxon
• Audrey Young: Luxon
• Thomas Coughlan: Luxon

Stuff

• Luke Malpass: Draw/Luxon
• Tova O’Brien: Draw/Luxon

The Spinoff

• Madeleine Chapman: David Cunliffe
• Haimona Gray: Not clear, but says Hipkins not succeed
• Anna Rawhiti-Connell: Luxon
• Toby Manhire: Draw/Luxon
• Tara Ward: Not clear
• Ben Thomas: Luxon
• Charlotte Muru-Lanning: Draw
• Stewart Sowman-Lund: Not clear
• Duncan Grieve: Not clear
• Joel MacManus: Luxon

So far I’ve not seen a single person say Hipkins won, but to be fair I have not checked The Standard recently!

The full results are here.

Party Vote

• National 37% (-2% from last poll)
• Labour 27% (-1%)
• ACT 12% (+2%)
• Greens 12% (+2%)
• Maori Party 2.9% (+0.3%)
• NZ First 5.0% (nc)
• NZ Lotal 1.2% (+0.8%)
• Freedoms NZ 0.7% (+0.2%)
• TOP 1.4% (nc)
• New conservatives 0.1% (-0.7%)
• DemocracyNZ 0.2% (-0.1%)

Seats

• Labour 34 (-31 from election)
• national 46 (+13)
• ACT 15 (+5)
• Greens 15 (+5)
• nz first 6 (+6)
• Maori 4 (+2)

Government

• National/ACT 61/120
• Labour/Greens/maori 53/120

Preferred PM (unprompted)

• Chris Hipkins 23% (nc)
• Christopher Luxon 23% (nc)
• David Seymour 5% (nc)
• Chloe Swarbrick 2% (+1%)
• winston peters 4% (nc)
• Jacinda Ardern 1% (nc)
• Nicola Willis 2% (+1%)

She needs to go into areas such as South Auckland and explain results like those below. (NB: I use UE for LEAVERS as a proxy for the academic results at lower levels).

University Entrance for Leavers

–        Papakura High School – 8%

–        Mangere College – 8.9%

–        Tangaroa College – 11.1%

–        Southern Cross Campus – 11.6%

–        Manurewa High School – 12.2% (down from 23.6% in one year)

–        James Cook High School – 12.8%

–        Sir Edmund Hillary Collegiate – 13.2%

These are almost all in long-term Labour electorates but there is no sign that Labour cares. They are by no means the worst outcomes for schools but in the area this is what Labour calls “choice”.

For those who think ethnicity and ability are strongly linked St Joseph’s Maori Girls had 92% of their 2022 Leavers graduate with UE.

What are the solutions people? Cameron Bagrie notes that if we want to see the nation in 20 years time – look at our education system now.

These young people are being failed and Hipkins was the Minister of Education for over 5 years.

Keep in mind we are now have a situation where 25% of our young people are leaving school, after 13,200 funded hours, without even having Level 1 NCEA.

(Please email me for the full date set on every high school in NZ re L3 NCEA, UE, Retention, Progress to Degree level study … all in ranked spreadsheets. Plus system aggregates. [email protected])

The Herald reports:

Labour has dumped its target to keep the country’s prison population 30 per cent lower than 2017 levels, should it secure re-election next month.

After presiding over six years of rising crime levels yet fewer arrest, fewer prosecutions and fewer prison terms, Labour dumps its policy a few days before the election.

The way to reduce the prison population is to reduce criminal offending, not to reduce consequences for serious violent and sexual offenders

I didn’t watch it as I was settling children, but from the media summaries it looks like neither leader did poorly, so unlikely to lead to any shift in the polls.

What did readers make of it?

The Herald reports:

A hīkoi has begun from Northland to Parliament to oppose National and ACT’s gang policies and highlight the impact they could have on the whānau of gang members.

The 10-person strong trip, led by Matilda Kahotea (Ngāti Pūkenga), is stopping off at marae and gang houses along the way to explain the policies, get signatures for a petition and to encourage people to vote.

The fact gangs are so against a change of Government tell us a lot. They know they have never had it better.

Stuff reports:

Labour is re-promising to lift the age of eligibility for free breast cancer screening, just a few months after saying there weren’t enough health workers for the expansion to go ahead.

Labour leader Chris Hipkins and the party’s women’s caucus delivered their pitch to women on Sunday, including the promise of extended breast screening.

This is a 2017 Labour and NZ First coalition commitment, which hasn’t been actioned despite calls from the Opposition and Breast Cancer Foundation.

So Labour promised to do this in 2017, failed to do it for six years, said it was not possible earlier this year, and now suddenly it is promising to do it again.

They really do think we’re all stupid.

Alex Holland writes:

Race based special treatment rather than treatment based on need (for any ethnicity) is becoming a real issue. Two out of every three voters believe NZ has become more divided. Here are some of the rights & funding ring-fenced by one human attribute (ancestry), many of which have been introduced under this Labour government:

• Labour announced 12 new HIGH protection areas in Auckland’s Hauraki Gulf to ‘protect and restore marine ecosystems’, while STILL allowing only Maori to fish in them. They are not marine reserves; they are race based exclusive fishing zones.
• Te Whatu Ora is using tax payer money for Maori & Pacific of any age (only Maori & Pacific ethnicity) to receive free advice and ‘management’ (including free medicines) at pharmacies for certain conditions.
• Reduced/removed rates for Maori landowners under the Local Government (Rating of Whenua Maori) Amendment Act 2021: 1. write off rates owing 2. remove rates altogether for land owned but not developed 3. reduce any remaining rates
• The new $26 million visitor centre for Punakaiki rocks given to local Iwi who then they charge for entry.
• New guidelines from Pharmac reveal that “Maori are the priority population”. Essentially, those with Maori ethnicity will now be guaranteed priority treatment ahead of others with greater health needs.
• Iwi allowed their own justice system, which often does not go in the victim’s favour and gives lenient outcomes to offenders.
• Auckland surgeons must now consider ethnicity in prioritising patients for operations giving priority to Maori and Pacific Island patients (contrary to the Human Rights Act 1993).
• Since May 2023 only Maori & Pacifica are allowed to get GP referrals for free counselling.
• New Zealand Health Strategy 2023 should be equally about all New Zealanders but focuses on ‘Inequity for Maori’. ‘Maori’ or ‘Iwi’ are mentioned 169 times while ‘European’ is mentioned 4 times.
• The Department of Internal Affairs has released a proposal for a new way to regulate social media and traditional media platforms that will control what can and cannot be discussed online. However, Maori are given elevated status in a co-governing role within the regulatory body. Maori are granted protections to “express themselves freely,” a privilege not given to any other New Zealander. The proposal will place Maori at the heart of the decisions about what New Zealanders are allowed to say.
• Labour have decided that rather than looking for low price and minimum risk, government agencies need to ENSURE 8% of government contracts go to Maori business. Only Maori can apply for all government contracts, everyone else is restricted to 92% of them.
• $560 million tax payer funding to support Maori in getting the free Covid vaccine, including cash incentives for Maori to get vaccinated. Also, a Covid vaccine ‘Priority Access Code’ was made available if you were Maori.
• $438 million in tax payer funding given to upgrade privately owned marae across the country (510 projects – 358 marae, from a ‘range’ of crown funds including from the Covid funds).
• Labour set aside $7.75 million for truancy issues for Maori & Pacific students.
• All employees from the Department of Conservation will get paid $3500 (of tax payer money) if they attend a Maori language course.
• Labour have changed the rules so if Maori or Pacific Islanders make up over half of a GP’s clients they get an increase in funding. If the proportion is 49% or below, they get no increase.
• Three waters proposal will give Maori 50% voting rights (with only 16% ‘opting’ as Maori) and power of veto over all water. Labour spent $14 million tax payer dollars on increasing Iwi/Maori understanding of the changes, including a $220 per hour ‘strategic advisor’ in Maori.
• New water services entity amendment bill (for 3 waters) states that public submissions (Community Priority Statements) ‘may’ be considered. In contrast, the Water Services Entities (WSE’s) ‘must’ respond directly to Te Mana o te Wai Statements and ‘must’ include a plan how the Water Services Entities intends to give effect to Te Mana o te Wai Statements – the new “Community Priority Statements” fall well short of the powers provided to local Maori through Te Mana o te Wai statements. This is what Labour is not telling you about as these are at the operational level, unlike the (50%) c*o-governance at the Regional Representative Groups level.
• Labour giving Maori access to funding for their legal costs to claim the Seabed & Foreshore, from mean high tide out to 12 nautical miles. Opponents to Maori claims must fund their own legal costs.
• $7.3 million tax payer dollars to make new screening process for cervical cancer screening free for Maori and Pacific Island woman but anyone else pays $40-$60.
• Labour funded $107,280 in taxpayer money to a racist stage show about murdering James Cook, his descendants and ‘white men like him’ with pig hunting knives.
• Requirement for staff to take into account a student’s cultural identity when awarding passing grades; rather than their individual merit.
• Labour announced 20 per cent of commercial spectrum to be given to Maori, a permanent Maori spectrum entity will be established and $75 million of funding will go towards development.
• Maori get free bowel screening from 55 years old. Also, Andrew Little announced Maori will get superior access to bowel screening etc.
• Maori and Pacifica are automatically entitled to free flu injections over 55 years of age, aged 30 & over are eligible for a free extra Covid booster and free anti-viral Covid treatment over the age of 50 (for everyone else it is 65 & over).
• Labour has prioritised Plunket care for Maori and Pacifica, all other ethnicities have been deprioritised.
• Labour using tax payer funds during a cost-of-living crisis & record debt to re-name streets, parks & government departments to Maori names – no cost/benefit justification given.
• Labour spent tax payer money to reformat the New Zealand passports so that now Te Reo is before any English rather than after it – no cost/benefit justification given, and now every border control in the world has to sift through a foreign language to read the passport (reducing efficiency).
• Maori don’t have to score mid to high 90’s to pass exam to get into medical school.
• Only Maori can legally collect particular shell fish in particular areas.
• Auckland Council is aiming to have 5 percent of the value of all direct contracts awarded to diverse suppliers – Maori and/or Pasifika-owned business or social enterprises.
• Auckland Transport’s target is to have 2 percent of the value of procurement spend with Maori-owned businesses by the end of 2023.
• Watercare aims for 5 percent of total spend to be with Maori businesses by the end of the 2025 financial year.
• Powers given to Maori to close public National parks (e.g. Whirinaki Conservation Park rahui restricting all access for people from outside the immediate community had been invoked by Ngati Whare).
• Without consulting anyone, Tuhoe had removed 15 huts from the Ureweras and planned to remove the other 33.
• Labour deciding what input Maori (only) should have in immigration policy.
• Labour removed rights voters had to trigger a local binding referendum – e.g. Maori wards.
• Labour’s Local Government Minister trying to get 50% of Council seats to be held by Maori.
• $12 million government support for Maori landowners to invest in growing sheep milk industry.
• Report by the Auditor-General on the $290 million “Strategic Tourism Assets Protection Programme”: The Tourism Recovery Minister decided to fund all tourism businesses that scored more than 15 out of 30 points in the assessment process. They also decided to fund all eligible Maori tourism businesses, including those that scored less than 15 out of 30 points in the assessment process.
• Labours Budget for 2020 had $1 billion to improve outcomes for Maori in response to Covid-19.
• $1.1 billion for Maori in Budget 2021.
• 2022 Budget: An extra $26m (now $155m in total) for “Progressive Procurement” – i.e. favouring Maori-owned businesses as government contractors. $118m in “advisory services” for farmers and Maori land owners. $580m for “Maori Health and wellbeing” including $188m for the new Maori Health Authority. $20m establishing new “Iwi-Maori Partnership Boards” (i.e. introducing co-governance to the new health system). A $1 billion “Maori Budget” including: $91m on Maori trades, training, and cadetships, $3m for “marae connectivity”, $5m for Iwi/Maori teachers. $200m for Maori education. $28m for Maori “language, culture and identity”. $162m for Maori organisations to reduce emissions, including $36m for “matauranga [traditional knowledge]-based approaches to reducing biological emissions” and $30m for “Maori Climate Action”. $178m for councils dealing with RMA reform with a new “National Maori Entity” to co-govern resource management.
• Maori have been allocated a total of $825 million in 2023 Wellbeing Budget.
• 2023 Budget: Te Matatini (Maori performing arts festival) has its annual funding increased from $2.9 million per year to $34 million over the next two years.
• Money set aside for poor people is being taken from the community services card fund to give Maori and only Maori women a $50 Prezzy card who turn up for their pregnancy assessment. That means if you have 1% Maori ancestry and are rich, you will still get a $50 Prezzy card (from the fund for the poor) because of your trace of Maori ancestry, not because you need it. Not available for anyone actually in need that doesn’t have Maori ancestry.
• Labour splashed tax payer money on Warriors match tickets or food vouchers for Maori and Pasifika who hadn’t filled in their census forms. $2 million was budgeted for handing out support vouchers to get non-responding individuals and households to complete the census.
• Tax payer money for ‘Whanau to achieve their aspirations’ through Whanau Ora commissioning agencies.
• Free hospital parking tickets to Maori with a family member in hospital.
• Maori private business given tax payer money & loans – e.g. Wai Ariki Hot Springs and Spa: $14 million given to it and an additional $38 million dollar tax payer loan.
• Primary Healthcare operations/organisations paid $25 per patient to screen Maori & Pacific for Cardiovascular.
• Specialist Education is scaled where Maori & Pacifica leap frog others for specialist education support.
• Labour handed out $70 million in tax payer dollars to set up 30 Iwi lead community panels instead of courts for Maori offenders. Also, the Police Commissioner has established a 21-member Maori Focus Forum that not only co-designs policing strategy for dealing with Maori offenders, but also plays a “governance role”. The end result of this partnership with Iwi is that Police “live up to the joint expectations of those partners, to improve long term wellbeing for Maori who come to Police attention.” In other words, Maori justice is all about the offender – ensuring they have a positive outcome. There is little regard for the victim. A violent attack that sent a tourist to hospital resulted in no arrests, no charges, no court, no sentence – only a chat with a community panel of iwi. It seems the Police have now become “an inclusive partner for Iwi Maori”. As a result, offenders who are Maori now have a different pathway – one that looks past the victim to embrace the culture of the offender.
• Probation Officers being told to move away from recommending imprisonment for Maori & Pacific Islanders.
• Labour launched a $98 million dollar strategy to reduce Maori over-representation in prisons in August 2019. By 2022 the proportion of Maori in prison had increased. Meantime, Marama Davidson (leader of Greens party) stated “I am a prevention violence minister. I know who causes violence in the world, it is white cis men”.
• The Plant Variety Rights Bill introduces a Maori Plant Varieties Committee. It can block plant varieties being registered and the bill says ‘A person must not be appointed as a member of the committee unless, in the opinion of the Commissioner, the person is qualified for appointment, having regard to that person’s knowledge of matauranga Maori.’
• Maori party put on their website that ‘it is a well-known fact that Maori are genetically superior’. To date, no apology has been given.
• Labour is removing or reducing biodiversity protection restrictions for Maori land (changing FNDC SNA mapping), but does this extend to anyone else?
• Labour has dedicated $18 million tax payer dollars (over four years) for iwi-based events and resources that support whanau, hapu and iwi to grow and lead their practices and customs relating to te kahui o Matariki/Matariki Public Holiday.
• Government lead Mapping for Sites and Areas of Significance to Maori (SASM) didn’t involve Farmers consultation – Timura council alone has identified 4000 property owners whose lands fits into the 5 categories of SASM regulations (sacred areas).
• A fund administered by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment invests in projects designed to strengthen capability, capacity, skills and networks between Maori and the science and innovation system.
• Parliament’s new ‘Te Kahui Mouri’ (2 wooden Maori poles) unveiled in July 2023 cost tax payers $500,000, described as “tone-deaf” during a cost-of-living crisis when Kiwis are “being asked to tighten their belts”.
• Counsellors being told they can only accept young people & Maori & Pacifica. Also, a psychologist in Wellington said that hospitals are referring Maori & Pacific Islanders to private psychologist and the businesses are losing money because they often don’t turn up. Any other ethnicity can only be referred to the public health system, there is a 5-month waiting list unless they pay for private care themselves.
• Police and the government turn a blind eye to illegal occupation of private land only if under Maori protest occupation (e.g. Ihumatao & property on the banks of the Taipa River).
• $55 million fund for media to promote that the Treaty of Waitangi is a partnership – forty percent of the first allocations went to projects benefiting Maori journalism. The fund prevents an opposing point of view to the Labour government’s race-based program.
• An Independent Maori Statutory Board has been established tasked with representing the views of Maori at the governance level in councils.
• The Hauraki Gulf Forum voted 11-7 in favour of changing its composition to that of a 50:50 co-governance authority with mana whenua and ‘others’. It is also proposing to develop its own statutory plans, that could prevail over council policies and central government decision-making, for all matters in respect of the Gulf. Although the elected members voted 7-5 against the proposals, six more votes were collected from the tangata whenua appointed members making the final vote 11-7 in favour of the proposals.
• $49,999 towards an Indigenised Hypno-soundscape to take you to the ‘imagined worlds of our Korero Purakau’.
• The Health Coalition Aotearoa claiming ‘The Burden of obesity has been disproportionately carried by Maori and Pacifica’ is a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi.
• The Canterbury Regional Council (Ngai Tahu Representation) Bill setting a significant precedent for unelected iwi representation.
• $100 million regional employment scheme to focus on Maori & Pasifika people.
• The Maori Health Authority (Te Aka Whai Ora) is spending more than $1.15 million a month on contractors and consultants. The Maori Health Authority will have veto rights over the entire health system; Maori patients to be prioritised over non-Maori.
• Even before the Pae Ora (Health Reform) legislation came into effect, $22 million was allocated to establishing the Maori Health Authority board headed up by Nanaia Mahuta’s sister Tipa.
• In 1997 the New Zealand Government returned the rights of greenstone (pounamu) ownership to Te Rūnanga o Ngai Tahu. Therefore, all greenstone found becomes the right of Iwi to obtain & sell.
• In conservation, an Options Developments Group set up by the Department of Conservation to better recognise the ‘Treaty partnership’ recommends “the delegation, transfer and devolution of functions and powers within the conservation system to tangata whenua”.
• Waitangi Tribunal’s Wai 262 report categorises as Maori ‘taonga’ a wide range of ‘treasures’ including intellectual property rights, genetics, and all living species in the country – both native and introduced. In 2020, $6.2 million was allocated to develop a Treaty partnership programme to ensure Maori ‘participate in, benefit from and make decisions’ over anything identified ‘taonga’.
• A 91.75% majority vote to change Playcentre Aotearoa’s constitution has been overruled due to Maori co-governance vote having ultimate power.
• Labour quietly slipped through legislation that empowers Iwi (only Maori) to legally run roadblocks.
• Labour announced a $730 million Maori housing budget to build 1000 homes and repair 700 owner-occupied homes over four years.
• 68 public schools’ ownership moving to Ngati Toa Rangatira.
• The Mahi Whakaara programme is part of the Maori Trades and Training Fund (MTTF), a $18.5 million government leg up for Maori jobseekers.
• Labour announced $38 million will go to strengthening existing initiatives in Maori and Pacific communities for family and sexual violence prevention.
• Tax payer funds committed to develop a specific Maori Climate Strategy and Action Plan.
• Kainga Ora spent $204,897 on koha between 2019-2021 (interact with marae or have someone perform a ceremonial role, majority of time it has been a monetary contribution). That is just one government agency, what other agencies have given money to Iwi? What other cultures have received equivalent gifts – if any?
• Maori Development Minister Willie Jackson says Labour will invest $25 million into the Cadetships programme, delivered by Te Puni Kōkiri.
• Te Pae Tawhiti programme which supports research and innovation in the Maori economy is getting a further $27.6 million investment over the next four years.
• $25.9 million funding for Ngai Tahu to reduce young South Island Maori in state care.
• Labour funding polytechnic to convert its workbooks and assessments for its level 3 automotive engineering course to Te Reo Maori.
• Labour is allocating $6.5 million into a programme set to enhance Maori employment outcomes in the research, science and innovation workforce.
• Planning laws to be taken from local councils – given to 14 co-governed entities. The Herald reports, Labour has decided that there will be 14 regional planning committees throughout New Zealand comprising representatives of the local government and of Maori.
• The new Maori Health Authority has a budget of half a billion dollars and CEO Riana Manuel has allocated $100 million of that to support centuries-old treatments called “maramataka” – the Maori tradition of using the moon and stars to help treat mental health issues.
• Nanaia Mahuta was associate minister when her husband’s firm was awarded $72,999 Government contract to facilitate six meetings (hui) and 14 workshops to engage with Maori and to provide a “high-level overview” of the agency’s Auckland housing projects.
• Labour announced a $80 million Maori media strategy.
• The Reserve Bank is looking to use its position and insights to improve access to capital for Maori (only).
• Auckland Council uses rates for Maori outcomes funding & Tūpuna Maunga Operational Plan.
• Cyclone Gabrielle: Maori given $15 million to support a Maori-led recovery of flood-hit communities.
• Pacifica & Maori patients in South Auckland are to be seen by a medical professional on the day they seek help, pushing everyone else further down the list.
• Health minister has set aside $2.2 million on ‘PR consultants’ on new Maori Health authority.
• Think tank Tokona Te Raki – Maori Futures Collective has launched a new action plan to remove streaming from schools by 2030 because they consider it ‘racist’; rather than advancing the top tier students, they would prefer to hold back potential.
• Te Kainga rental building – quality two and three bedroom apartments for Wellingtonians that are below market rate for the inner city. Applicants who work for Maori organisations are prioritised.
• Special provisions for Maori culture: Kindergarten Teachers Accept Latest Collective Agreement Offer including ‘a cultural allowance for kaiako Maori’.
• Students who have some Maori or Pasifika heritage not only have access to the scholarships designated for them, but also have the opportunity to apply for the same scholarships that a non-Maori/Pasifika can.
• Only Maori get to choose what electoral role they are on and swap back and forth at any time. Maori seats were meant to be abolished in 1879 when the rule was removed that you had to own land under your personal name (inadvertently excluding groups/tribes) to be able to vote.
• Labour has encouraged integrating Te Reo into English to normalise ‘Pidgin English’, rather than supporting both as separate important languages in their own right. Labour used this Pidgin English to communicate important announcements throughout Covid19 & other emergencies – whether you understood it or not. Rawiri Waititi called all non-Maori New Zealanders who did not speak Maori “dumb”.
• Hone Harawira says it is appropriate for Maori (only) to eat Kereru (protected native pigeon).
• Labour has spent tax payer money on introducing a school ‘history’ curriculum that supports the Maori view of New Zealand to indoctrinate children into ‘Te Tiriti o Waitangi principles & partnership’.
• Special tax rates e.g. Maori ‘Charitable Trust’.
• State Funding proposed for ‘A new fund – Te Putea Whakangawari Korero a-Tiriti / Treaty Facilitation Fund – should be available to facilitate party and candidate engagement with Maori communities, in ways appropriate for Maori.’
• The tax payer paid free school lunches programme was given an extra $323 million in the 2023 budget to keep it running. 48% of students receiving the free lunches are Maori. A Treasury report was hugely critical of it with found no evidence of impacting attendance or benefiting akonga Maori.
• Maori Party calling for Maori (only) to get pension to start at 57 years old.
• Covid Response funds are spent on:
• Atawhai Interactive Tapui, which received $250,000 towards production of Toroa, that gives tamariki and rangatahi an experience to fly as Toroa on its journey from the Pacific Ocean back to its home on Taiaroa head. It will explore the themes of whakapapa as the Toroa soars over the ocean, deified as Takaroa, on the winds of Tawhirimatea.
• $1,323,000 Taki Rua Productions – The development and delivery of two immersive live productions of large-scale contemporary Māori performing arts pieces.
• $1,015,300 Maoriland Charitable Trust to deliver Purita, a capability system to enable identification and development of Maori potential.
• $248,460 on traditional Māori painting.
• $20,000 Te Runaka o Ōtakou scoping the use of a web platform to leverage purakau [myths and legends], and traditional and contemporary technologies to connect with the Otakou diaspora.
• $20,000 on a business plan for Tongan mat-weaving.
• $20,000 To develop a business plan for virtual reality recreations of current Maori wahi tapu [sacred places] with an initial focus on Kai Tahu marae and their historic sites of interest.
• $20,000 To contribute to the creation of a te reo Maori children’s book which uses an app to embellish the story with music and claymation videos, and allows the reader to recreate waiata using instrumental loops.
• There are New Zealand national sporting teams & awards defined by race.
• Maori Data Governance Model has been designed by Maori for use across the New Zealand public service – that could affect your data.
• While the Waitangi tribunal holds the government (tax payer) to account for historical transgressions against Maori, there is no tribunal holding Iwi to account for any of their historical transgressions (e.g. Ngati Tama and Ngati Mutunga genocide & slavery of the Chatham Islands Moriori up until 1867).
• While no financial assistance is available for anyone wanting to oppose tribal claims, the government has provided lucrative funding of up to $458,000 for applicants to prepare their case, with further funding available for historical research as well as for legal fees and other costs associated with court hearings – including accommodation, air fares, meals etc.
• Researchers asked academics to assess their own freedom on a number of issues on a scale of zero to 10. Newsroom reports: The lowest scoring area was freedom to debate or discuss issues around the Treaty of Waitangi and colonialism.
• Money channelled into marae renovations, and Maori and Pasifika businesses questioned by the Office of the Auditor-General – on the $640 million of public money spent on the Provincial Growth Fund (PGF), we are not yet certain that Parliament or the public can have confidence that the investments made through the PGF reset will ultimately represent good value for money, did not see evidence of planning for, or commitment to, an evaluation of the outcomes.
• In 1948 Prime Minister Peter Fraser signed the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights”, but this Labour government has introduced laws & policy to remove equal rights: The surgical waitlist equity adjuster tool introducing racial profiling into healthcare, the eligibility for drugs funded by Pharmac, the eligibility for Medical School training and the eligibility for screening etc.
• Labour Kieran McAnulty on Maori special treatment: “There are provisions that we have in this country that wouldn’t stand up to a purely academic democratic framework but that’s not how we work in New Zealand”.

Stuff reports:

A man forbidden from driving took methamphetamine hours before driving an unregistered, unwarranted car at more than 200kph, losing control and killing a dad of two. 

Brydon Boyce, 43, on Friday admitted a charge of manslaughter in relation to a crash in Havelock North that claimed the life of Marco Milliaccio, a football-loving dad of a young son and daughter.

Boyce had been forbidden from driving since 2017. The car was not registered or warranted and was considered unwarrantable.

One of his mates was in the front passenger’s seat; the other was in the back seat. Neither was wearing a seatbelt. …

Two experts analysed the CCTV video. One expert calculated that the vehicle was travelling between 200kph and 250kph, and the other calculated an average vehicle speed of 214kph.

The crash investigators calculated Boyce’s speed at the time of the crash at 115kph. Milliaccio had been driving at between 36 and 49kph. Milliaccio’s car was pushed 19 metres backwards onto the grass verge as a result of the impact. …

When police searched his car they found 128.66 grams of methamphetamine packaged in 57 different sized plastic resealable zip lock bags and containers, stored in the boot of the vehicle. They also found 58.58 grams of cannabis plant in three resealable plastic bags, 2.59 grams of pseudoephedrine, $11,365 cash, a loaded pistol and ammunition.

He has pleaded guilty to the manslaughter of Milliaccio, two charges of reckless driving causing injury, possession of methamphetamine for supply, possession of cannabis for sale, possession of pseudoephedrine, unlawful possession of a pistol and unlawful possession of ammunition.

So he was driving high on meth at speeds over 200 km/hr in a car with no registration or warrant and was a banned driver. He killed an innocent person who was driving safely.

The recklessness in this case was so massive, I do wonder if he should have been charged with murder instead of manslaughter. The Crimes Act does say a homicide can be murder if:

if the offender for any unlawful object does an act that he or she knows to be likely to cause death, and thereby kills any person, though he or she may have desired that his or her object should be effected without hurting any one.

I think you can make the case the act of driving so fast was likely to cause death.

A reader writes in:

Labour vs National top 20 in electorate seats

1.  Remutaka (Hipkins),   Botany (Luxon)
2.  Te Tai Tokerau (Davis),  Ohariu (Willis)
3. Kelston (Sepuloni),  Hutt South (Bishop)
4. Wigram (Woods),  Whangarei (Reti)
5.  Tauranga (Tinetti),  Epsom (Goldsmith)
6. Northland (Prime), Taupo ( Upston)
7. West Coast-Tasman (O’Connor), East Coast Bays (Stanford)
8. Tamaki Makaurau (Henare), Waimakariri (Doocey)
9.  Maungakiekie (Radhakrishnan), Pakuranga (Brown)
10.  Wairarapa (McAnulty),  Papakura (Collins)
11.  Hutt South (Andersen), Whangaparaoa (Mitchell)
12. Mana (Edmonds),  Rotorua (McClay)
13.  Rangitata (Luxton),  Mt Albert (Lee)
14. Christchurch Central (Webb),  Port Waikato (Bayly)
15.  Hauraki-Waikato (Mahuta*),  Invercargill (Simmonds)
16.  Te Tai Tonga (Tirikatene),  North Shore (Watts)
17.  New Lynn (Russell),  Kaipara ki Mahurangi (Penk)
18.  Dunedin (Brooking),  Selwyn (Grigg)
19.  Panmure-Otahuhu (Salesa),  Rangitikei (Redmayne)
20.  Palmerston North (Utikere), Napier (Nimon)

*presumed top 20

When the Labour and National lists came out I was very intrigued by the electorate spread the two parties had across their top 20 list positions who are running for electorate ( a vaguely decent proxy for ideal Cabinet positions, ignoring list only MPs). 
As you can see, in only 1 seat – Hutt South – do 2 prospective Cabinet Ministers face off. In all other 19 spots, there is no face off between a National and a Labour heavyweight. This even holds true if you include the electorates where “Cabinet Minister/ Speaker” list only MPs standing down this election have held sway – Wellington Central (Robertson), Te Tai Hauauru (Rurawhe) – even Ilam (Brownlee) if you want to go that far. You have to go down to number 26 on the list Belich (Epsom) to find the next “heavyweight” duel.

There are a number of probable explanatory factors in play – Labour’s reliance on the Māori seats, where National has little credit in the bank, Labour’s high number of list only places in their top 20. the loss of so many National electorate seats at the last election- but the level of different focus is striking, and I wonder to what degree it differs from previous elections. It seems strange to me that there are not more common battleground prestige seats, such as the Central seats, in Wellington, Auckland, Christchurch ( of which only Christchurch makes this list at all!), or major provincial city seats Hamilton, Tauranga, Dunedin – looking at you. Is this just a highly unusual convergence of factors, or are we seeing a strong split of the major parties in the seats that they consider most important?

This leads me to my second analysis – geographic spread of these “Cabinet Minister” seats between the two parties. Once again we see some striking differences. For this analysis’ sake let’s throw back in those list only presumptive Cabinet Ministers who are only stepping out of electorate races this election, so have a clear geographic tie to a seat still.  So Wellington Central, Te Tai Hauauru and Ilam in for Palmerston North, Panmure-Otahuhu and Napier (acknowledging that the 3 we’re removing are highly unlikely to feature in any immediate Cabinet post-election, while those coming back in are presumptively cabinet ministers or Speaker). This gives us:

Labour 
5 Maori seats  (Te Tai Tokerau, Tamaki Makaurau, Te Tai Hauauru, Hauraki-Waikato, Te Tai Tonga)
5 Wellington-ish seats (Wellington Central, Mana, Hutt South, Remutaka, Wairarapa)

5 South Island seats – 2 Christchurch (Christchurch Central, Wigram, Dunedin, Rangitata, West-Coast Tasman)
2 other North Island seats (Northland, Tauranga)

3  Auckland seats (Kelston, Maungakiekie, New Lynn)

National

0 Māori seats

2 Wellington-ish seats (Ohariu, Hutt South)

4 South Island seats – 3 Christchurch (Ilam, Waimakariri, Selwyn, Invercargill)

5 other North Island seats (Whangarei, Taupo, Rotorua, Port Waikato, Rangitikei)

9! Auckland seats  (Botany, Epsom, East Coast Bays, Pakuranga, Papakura, Whangaparaoa, Mt Albert, North Shore, Kaipara ki Mahurangi)

Even with some appropriate caveats -prominent list only MPs for Labour in Auckland (Jackson, Parker), the Māori seats being a major point of difference- the differences are stark. Labour places much more than population focus on Wellington and on the Maori seats, and much much less than population on Auckland. National is majorly overrepresented in Auckland, and surprisingly less in the South Island and rural electorates than stereotypes might have made us suspect. Does this reflect electoral strategy? A possible attempt at harnessing an anti-COVID Auckland backlash? Is it all simply random, just a product of where the parties’ most competent MPs just happen to be based? Happy to let you be the judge, but interested to hear your thoughts.