I have been writing curriculum in NZ since I started teaching in 1991. This developed into writing a full curriculum– all core subjects and 32 cross-curricula projects – for Year 7 – 10 in 2002. I have adapted that every year since and appreciated the much greater scope & freedom of the 2007 NZ curriculum. My curriculum has been applied to great effect in three schools that I have founded – across a very wide range of demographics and developed abilities.

1. The first major problem with the new curriculum proposed is the implication that schools have not had the ability (or knowledge) to create great English learning opportunities for students.

In terms of English during the four years in the curriculum I have applied students will have studied the vast majority of:

The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (Novel), Chicken Run (Film), Don Quixote Mulan (FILM), The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers  (FILM and book excerpts), Woman in Gold (FILM), The Monument Men (Film), Charlie & The Chocolate Factory (Novel), and other Road Dahl texts, The Bee Movie, Real, Raw and Relatable (Humans of South Auckland Book), A Game of Cards, Fire on Greenstone, and Gathering the Whakapapa – Short Story Trilogy (Witi Ihimaera), Charlotte’s Web (Novel) or Jungle Book (Novel & FILM), Cats (Musical/Film) & The Lion King, Drallion (Cirque FILM), The Wonderful World of Henry Sugar (Novel), The Highwayman (Poem), Rabbit Proof Fence (Film), Swan Lake (FILM), Joseph (FILM), The Odyssey (Book), The World’s Fastest Indian (FILM), The Silent One (Novel), The Orator (FILM), October Sky (FILM), Apollo 13 (Film) or The Right Stuff (Film), The Fat Man (Novel) and Other Maurice Gee texts for extension readers, A Fitting Tribute – Short Story (CK Stead), A Great Day – Short Story (Frank Sargeson), The Whale Rider (Novel & Film), Mao’s Last Dancer (Film), The Silver Sword (Novel), The Snow Goose (Novella), Schindler’s List (FILM), Dunkirk (FILM), Avatar (Film), Ender’s Game, Amistad (Film),Amazing Grace (Film), The King’s Speech (FILM), Speeches of: Martin Luther King, Queen Elizabeth, Winston Churchill, King George V, David Ben Gurion, Chariots of Fire (FILM), Invictus (Film), A Beautiful Mind (FILM), Shakespearean plays (likely Romeo and Juliet – including Baz Luhrman’s film, Much Ado About Nothing, Mid-Summer Night’s Dream), Brother in the Land (Novel), I Am Legend (FILM), The Matrix (FILM), What’s Eating Gilbert Grape (FILM), The Great Gatsby (Novel & FILM), To Kill a Mocking Bird (Novel & FILM), Hurricane (FILM).

Writing now I am also considering David Walliams, and others, as engaging texts for children. I would definitely include The Overstory by Richard Powers.

The students will also have attended live performances where possible – Shakespeare at the pop-up-globe, CATS, Cirque du Soliel, etc.

There are also likely to have had books read out loud to them by great authors such and George MacDonald, Frederick Buechner, Douglas Adams.

Having a significant amount of content and at a good level has always been possible and, importantly, schools have been able to adapt to students, staff strengths and geographical locations.

2. Keeping in mind that the above texts/films/etc cover Year 7 – 10 – the “suggested” texts of the proposed curriculum (Year 7 – 13) show that those involved are significantly out off touch with young people within the NZ system. This can be added to the situation where OIA’s have shown that there is much confusion as to what a “knowledge rich” curriculum is.

A few of the texts are quite bizarre. The movie of Roald Dahl’s Fantastic Mr Fox is recommended for Year 9 & 10 – but is more at a 7 year old level. Whereas – MacBeth at Year 9 is a tough ask and there are much more accessible options if you have Shakespeare at that level.

The Crucible – by Arthur Miller is recommended. Surely, he has done his dash … but at least it is not Death of a Salesman.

I would think that even the 2019 film version of Little Women – is unlikely to lift all of the young men in need of inspiration in our schools.

1984 and The Lord of the Flies have also had their time. The themes are still relevant but better takes on those themes have been written since 1949 and 1954 (respectively) that are not likely to kill passion for literature in the same way.

There has also been some very good poetry since Shakespeare’s sonnets.

It is also true that there are a lot of engaging plays since A Streetcar Named Desire was first performed in 1947.

I nearly fell over to see Othello as the Year 13 Shakespeare suggestion. If students have survived until then – this might be the straw that breaks them.

And – to close out – how on earth does the writing group see Dubliners by James Joyce as having any relevance to young people in NZ in 2025. When that is added to Pride and Prejudice you really have to wonder if the writers have any awareness that these texts would have no appeal what-so-ever to the NZ teen cultural mix.

Now – I know that these texts are “suggestions” – but they set a theme. A theme that is narrow and completely out of touch with today’s young people. It smacks of a group of detached people sitting around a table and reminiscing about their youth.

[email protected]

I did an update to my article on Fale Andrew Lesa, noting Stuff reported that he said he said he is resigning from all his roles. I remember reading that and thinking he didn’t say he had resigned, but that he had “decided to resign from everything”. My caution in not reporting it as him having resigned was justified, because a further Stuff story reports:

In an email to a Stuff editor, Lesā said he would like to “retract” the story about his resignations.

So he has not resigned from a single thing?

In his statement, Lesā appears to have changed his mind again — back to his original position that he will resign after all.

“Public service has been the highlight of my life,” he wrote, “but it’s time to close the door on this chapter of my story.

So he said he is resigning. Then he said he is not. Then he implies he is again. Unless an actual resignation is received, I think one should assume he is not.

Stuff reports:

With a new trial for court bailiffs to seize cars if their owners haven’t paid fines, the Labour Party says innocent families could be left “stranded”.

The Government is trialling new technology for bailiffs to scan number plates as they search for people who have unpaid fines. They will then clamp or seize cars belonging to people with debt owed to the courts.

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith was celebrating the new tool on Friday, telling fine dodgers: “You may soon find yourself walking home or needing a lift.”

But Labour Party justice spokesperson Duncan Webb said seizing cars without warning would have unintended consequences, harming the taxpayer and also innocent people. He called it a “sad day” for the Government.

No matter what the issue, Labour can always be relied on to back the crims over victims!

The Herald reports:

The Government has agreed to build a new medical school, costing more than $230 million, at the University of Waikato.

The New Zealand Graduate School of Medicine will offer a four-year graduate programme for students who have completed a three-year undergraduate degree. …

“With $82.85 million in Government funding and over $150 million from the University, supported by philanthropic investment, this is a substantial commitment to education and regional development in the Waikato.

I’m pleased the taxpayer contribution has been scaled back to around $80 million.

The main driver of this has been Waikato University, who have been pushing this since 2016. The main reason, in my opinion, is prestige.

For quite a long period of time, Waikato University was not seen in the same league as the older universities. Otago, Auckland, Canterbury and VUW were all established in the 1800s. Massey followed in 1927 and then Waikato in 1964.

The law school especially was not seen as particularly good. I knew quite a few lawyers who said they would never hire a Waikato Law School graduate as it was seen as more political than legal. Today that is not the case, and instead I suspect AUT Law School is the one that struggles to find jobs for graduates.

Today Waikato is held in higher esteem (partly thanks to their VC, who I do rate highly (NB: He was my monetary economics lecturer at VUW, but I doubt he even remembers me). They are ranked not so bad in global rankings, but still a bit below the five older universities. A medical school would add considerably to their prestige. They are sort of the crown jewels of the university system.

So from Waikato’s point of view, they really want a medical school.

So is it a good idea from a health system point of view? Well I’m not an expert, but my initial position tends to be more choice and competition is good. A third medical school is better than a duopoly. Also Waikato has proposed a far stronger focus on rural health, which is badly needed. Their structure of a four year post graduate degree is different to the current double bachelors MBChB.

Just increasing places in the two current medical schools is certainly an option, and one that is probably cheaper. However considering the massive barriers they place in front of aspiring medical students who don’t fit into one of their quotas (they need a 95% grade average vs 70% for those who are a preferential demographic), I’m not convinced one should put all your eggs in that basket.

The Government has funded increased places at Otago and Auckland, and a new medical school at Waikato. Considering they have significantly reduced the taxpayer contribution from $280 million to $80 million, it looks like a good outcome. As I said, choice and competition is a good thing.

An excellent article by Roger Partridge on an analysis by Emeritus Professor Peter Watts KC on the Supreme Court’s actions in Ellis vs R. I recommend you read the whole thing, but a key extract is:

Before Ellis, tikanga’s role in New Zealand law was clearly defined and limited. As Watts shows, courts recognised tikanga within the common law in only two circumstances: cases involving customary property rights and matters intrinsically connected to Māori affairs, particularly aspects of family law involving Māori. Crucially, courts required a specific Māori connection to the facts before them.

As I have argued elsewhere, until Ellis, the legal framework for incorporating tikanga into the common law was equally specific. As established over a century ago in Public Trustee v Loasby (1908) 27 NZLR 801(SC), tikanga could only be recognised as part of the common law if it met longstanding requirements for recognising customs as law. The required features include certainty, antiquity and reasonableness.

Now there is no certainty and no reasonableness.

• Inflation down from 211% to 27%
• Economic growth from -1.6% to 5.2%
• Unemployment from 6.4% to 7.9%
• Poverty rate from 42% to 37%
• Fiscal deficit from -4.9% to 0.3% of GDP
• Government spending down around 30%

So inflation down, the deficit is now a surplus, a massive increase in economic growth and only a modest increase in unemployment. Pretty amazing.

Worth remembering that over 100 economists including Thomas Piketty warned that electing Milei would devastate the Argentina economy. Remember that when people quote Piketty.

Chloe leans into one of the oldest angti-semitic tropes around, saying Zionist billionaires control the world and are responsible for Israel’s continued existence – something she presumably views as a bad thing.

She also claims genocide is woven into the fabric of capitalism and colonisation. So bizarre. She also seems to say NZ company Rocket Lab is responsible for genocide

A reader sent in this screenshot of a Stuff Preferred PM poll. 70% name a left leader and 19% a leader from the right. That would seem to tell its much about who reads Stuff.

Was sad to read Hulk Hogan is dead, aged 71. As a kid and young adult I loved WWF (as it then was) and especially Hulk Hogan. Yes, I know it is all staged, but Hogan had charisma and was almost always a face rather than heel.

A lot of the 80s era are no longer alive. I think it is:

Alive: The Undertaker, Bret Hart, The Honky Tonk Man,Stone Cold Steve Austin, Ric Flair, Triple H, The Undertaker, Shawn Michaels, Jesse Ventura

Dead: Owen Hart, Andre the Giant, Roddy Piper, Macho Man, The Ultimate Warrior, Rick Rude, Miss Elizabeth

Professor Jerry Coyne writes:

Attempts to bring back extinct species are scientifically misguided and mis-reported by the press. He says that the press distorts what has been achieved scientifically, and pretends that an animal with only a few cosmetic gene edits is identical to an extinct species.

Changing a living species by editing a few genes to get something that looks like the extinct creature is not the same thing as re-creating the extinct creature. Professor Coyne tells us that extinct species embodied thousands of genetic differences from related modern species, including genes that affect metabolism and behavior. Control regions of genes, which lie outside protein-coding regions, are involved in differences between extinct species and their relatives, but we do not know where these regions are and so cannot use them for genetic editing.

Basically an Ostrich that looks a bit like a moa, is not a moa. It is just a genetically edited ostrich.

The BBC reports:

The president of Peru, Dina Boluarte, has issued a decree doubling her salary despite having a historically low approval rating of only 2%.

She will now be paid more than 35,500 soles ($10,000; £7,300) per month.

I thought this was a typo, but it isn’t.

She is on a 2% approval rating and just doubled her salary. It was around 20 times the average income and is now 40 times the average income!

She was, of course, elected to Parliament as a Marxist!

Gregory is a Professor at the University of Auckland. As I have explained many times a Zionist is simply a Jew who believes Israel has the right to exist as a Jewish majority state – a view shared by around 95% of Jews globally. It doesn’t mean they support the war in Gaza, the Netanyahu Government, settlements in a particular area etc. It just means they are Jewish and support Israel existing as a safe homeland for Jews.

So when Gregory says he wants to kick Zionist ass, how would that be taken by any Jewish students at Auckland University? Would they feel safe that one of their professors has said that he wants to kick their ass?

If a Jewish student was in one of his classes, would they feel safe wearing clothing that identifies them as Jewish?

The answer is of course not.

I’m not saying Gregory should face any sort of sanction for his language. What I am saying is that he probably regards himself as one of those tolerant inclusive types, and it would be nice if he considered using language that didn’t make Jews at Auckland University feel unwelcome, or worse.

The FSU announced:

Following a legal battle between Hutt City Council and the Free Speech Union over the Council’s censorship of inserts on Council sites, the parties have agreed to settle. The Council will make several public statements affirming its commitment to free speech, and its role as a gateway for information, not a gatekeeper, says Jonathan Ayling, Chief Executive of the Free Speech Union. 

“It is not the role of local councils to decide what ratepayers do and don’t read. We took Hutt City Council and its Chief Executive, Jo Miller, to court when they refused to resolve the matter with us. Local ratepayers deserve better. 

“The Hutt City Council removed a paid advertisement insert by the New Zealand Centre for Political Research (NZCPR) from newspapers from all council sites. The insert was from ‘Treaty of Waitangi – An Explanation’ by Sir Āpirana Ngata and was published in 31 NZME and Stuff newspapers. 

“However, we now welcome Hutt City Council’s agreement to settle with us and their commitment to free speech and the right to impart and receive information and opinions as a critical part of our society.  They’ve also acknowledged that if similar situations arise in the future, the Council would be likely to adopt a different approach.

The decision to remove the inserts was repugnant. Hutt City Council defended the decision. It is good they no longer do so.

An article at Newsroom states:

Increasing the number of electric vehicles in the fleet reduced the health harms from exhaust air pollution, but there were more injuries because people were driving more because of the cheaper cost of driving electric cars.

So they see people driving more as it is cheaper as a bad thing! How terrible that electric cars have lower running costs than petrol cars.

The Herald reports:

A cross-sector group of concerned citizens is urging the Government to reconsider its position on the proposed Gene Technology Bill.

Thousands are calling for a complete halt as the agricultural industry approaches the contentious bill with caution, warning there’s only one chance to get the legislation right. 

A petition by Lisa Er, founder of Lisa’s Hummus, was presented to Labour MP Deborah Russell at Parliament yesterday requesting work on the bill be paused.

Signed by at least 6058 people – including scientists, health professionals, and organic producers – the petition seeks to create a Royal Commission of Inquiry “into the health and safety of people and the environment on behalf of citizens”.

We have already had a Royal Commission into genetic engineering. It found it was safe, but the opponents ignored it. 30 years of actual deployment has not once turned up a safety issue. Those seeking another Royal Commission will ignore it if it doesn’t say what they want – it is just a delaying tactic.

Organic Aotearoa NZ commissioned the NZ Institute of Economic Research to conduct economic modelling on the bill’s effects in November last year.

The study estimated primary sector exports could lose up to $10-20 billion in value – roughly 40% of the agricultural export economy – from dropping NZ’s GMO-free status if the bill was passed.

LOL. Sure.

Has Australia suffered a 40% drop in earnings because of its regime? No.

The Herald reports:

Women should be prosecuted for having sex with monks, Thai politicians have proposed, after a nationwide scandal over an alleged “blackmailing seductress”.

At least nine monks have been disrobed for allegedly having sex with a woman accused of subsequently extorting them for millions.

A committee in the Senate has proposed amending the law to allow for the criminal prosecution of women who engage in sexual relations with monks.

The women are not the ones who take vows of chastity. Consensual sexual relations should rarely be criminalised, and if they are it should be the person breaching some duty of care. Prosecuting women who sleep with monks is like prosecuting students who sleep with their teachers!

Professor Phil Shane writes:

In 1972, Donella Meadows and a group of fellow Massachusetts Institute of Technology scientists used a then-powerful computer to generate a global systems model of human activity. Using decades of global data, and trying alternative scenarios, they reached a simple conclusion: “If the present growth trends in world population, industrialisation, pollution, food production, and resource depletion continue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next 100 years. The most probable result will be a rather sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity.”

The work was published as the book Limits to Growth, which became a bestseller and was translated into many languages. Though widely dismissed in mainstream economics, subsequent analysis of the past 50 years of global data by independent researchers such as econometrician and sustainability researcher Gaya Herrington has shown the original study is robust.

It is not just dismissed by economists, but by reality. The book predicted a huge scarcity of resources, and that this would of course lead to massive price increases. It’s the same idea as peak oil. The Simon-Ehrlich wager in 1980 was on whether the prices of copper, chromium, nickel, tin and tungsten would increase or decrease. The book would have you believe they would all increase. Here’s what happened:

• Nickel feel by 7%
• Copper fell by 18%
• Chromium fell. by 49%
• Tin fell by 55%
• Tungsten fell by 65%

This is what you call reality.

The good news is that our economy requiring constant growth to avoid collapse is a social construct and is not based on the biophysical reality. We could find an alternative. It is time for governments, education and communities to have an adult conversation about the future.

The notion of a world without economic growth appeals to rich privileged people. What it actually means is hundreds of millions not lifted from absolute poverty. There are countries in the world that don’t have economic growth. Their citizens are desperate to get out.

Radio NZ reports:

Universities and legal experts say there is no need for a bill protecting free speech on campus.

But the legislation’s supporters say universities can’t be trusted to uphold freedom of expression. …

Whenever I hear an academic insist there are no problems with free speech on campuses, what they mean is that they personally don’t have any issues because their progressive views are in the majority. They remind me of white southerners in the US who insist there is no racism in the south because they have never experienced racism. Try being an academic who doesn’t hold majority views on campus, and you’ll have a vastly different view.

So academics who insist there is no free speech issue on campuses should be given as much regard as Europeans who insist there is no racism in New Zealand.

Tertiary Education Union co-president Julie Douglas told the committee there was a lack of evidence that universities were limiting free speech.

That is because the universities and the TEU go out of their way to prevent any evidence being gathered.

If the TEU really believed there was no evidence, then they would support the universities surveying all staff and students and asking them how free they feel to speak openly on campus. No university has ever ever done this, because it would be a disaster if the wrong results eventuated.

Canterbury University biological sciences professor Tammy Steeves told the committee should not be required to host any event or speaker. She said academics could judge whether ideas were robust and evidence-based.

They’re not. That is a misrepresentation. It is about whether universities should be able to veto or withdraw an invite made by an academic or a campus club. Massey tried to ban a politics club from hearing from Don Brash, for those who need a memory boost. And the arrogance of the idea that academics are the only ones who can judge if ideas are robust shows you why the law is so badly needed.

Geddis said maintaining a culture of free speech would be more effective than making laws.

If there was a culture of free speech, then I would agree with Geddis. But I disagree that there is, so a law change is needed.

If you wish to persuade me there is a culture of free speech, then again I challenge any university to survey their entire staff and student population on whether they do feel free to speak freely on campus. I’d love to see those results, and would be delighted if I was wrong and in fact only a minuscule proportion of academics and students don’t feel they can speak freely.

Radio NZ have managed to do what feels like a dozen stories about something which is totally benign, but they are trying to manufacture as a conspiracy.

All their articles push the lines that powerful alcohol lobbyists stopped a review of the safe drinking guidelines. The latest is here. They also use deceptive language to mislead such as:

Outdated alcohol guidelines put New Zealand out of step with modern research, but our health authorities are in no hurry to update them.

Who says they are outdated? An assertion reported as a fact.

In Canada, proposed guidelines for low-risk drinking set the weekly limit at two drinks.

Note the word I have bolded. The guidelines in Canada have not actually changed. They are insisting we change our guidelines based on what has been proposed (but not accepted) in Canada. They no doubt hope people don’t notice that key word. The guidelines they refer to were basically rejected by the Canadian Government.

Through documents he received through the Official Information Act (OIA), he found that Health NZ commissioned a review of the low-risk guidelines. But in October 2024, a lobbyist emailed Ross Bell, who is a manager in the Ministry of Health’s Public Health Agency, asking why Health NZ’s website said the guidelines were under review.

In December, following a second email which again asked about the review and also complained about mention of the Canadian guidelines on Health NZ-run website ‘alcohol.org.nz’, Bell emailed Health NZ saying “All work on this project will now pause. You will update relevant Health NZ websites to remove references to the review and also to other jurisdictions’ guidelines (including the Canadian one).”

I also have copies of the e-mails, and they are quite mundane. And Radio NZ fail to mention that the issue around mention of the Canadian guidelines is because they are not guidelines. They are proposed, not accepted. A correct description would be rejected.

Here is the initial e-mail from the staffer at the Brewers Association:

I was just on the alcohol.org.nz website and I noted there is an update stating the NZ Alcohol Guidelines are under review. Do you have any information on this process such as when was this work commissioned, a timeline and who is undertaking the review. 

Any information would be appreciated.

That was it? A government website said there was a review, and they knew nothing about it. So they simply just asked about the process, the timeline and who is doing the review? This is what Radio NZ would have you believe was inappropriate.

The MOH manager replied:

Let me follow up with Health NZ – this isn’t something on our work programme, and it’s probably a responsibility that should sit with the Ministry/Public Health Agency.

So the MOH manager said a review is their responsibility and it is not on their work programme. That was it. Health NZ is the delivery arm, and MOH the policy arm, so this is not a conspiracy, or some lobbying. It is just how the Government is organised.

The MOH manager further e-mailed to say:

I’ve talked with Health NZ (Health Promotion). They are undertaking a piece of work on Screening and Brief Interventions. To support this piece of work, they had thought that a refresh of the guidelines was in order.

I’ve advised them that it’s the Ministry’s responsibility to lead on any technical/clinical public health guidelines, so they are pausing that specific piece of work on the guidelines but are continuing the important SBI work, using current guidelines.

A refresh of the guidelines is not on our current alcohol levy-related work programme, which is something we would need to agree with relevant ministers anyway. I’ll let you know at future meetings if this changes.

So the MOH manager said he had followed up with Health NZ, any review would be done by the Ministry, and it is not on their work programme which would need to be agreed by Ministers.

Nowhere did the Brewers Association demand there be no review. Nowhere does MOH say they won’t do a review at some stage. They simply say it is not on their current work programme, which is agreed to by Ministers.

Perhaps Radio NZ thinks the Ministry of Health should be independent of government, and set a work programme based on what Radio NZ thinks they should be doing?

And the final e-mail from the Brewers Association to MOH was:

I just wanted to follow up on your email below as well as our previous discussions on the levy framework piece you were undertaking.

Firstly I know you mentioned we’d likely see something of the levy framework around now. I understand how these things can push out. Is that still a timeline we can expect or even prior to Christmas?

Asking a timeframe for a levy (which they pay!) review.

It was raised with me by one of our stakeholders that the Alcohol.org.nz website which hosts the NZ guidelines is still stating that they are under review. Given what you have noted below I was wondering why this was still stated as the case online.

So they noted that the website was still incorrect. Does Radio NZ think the website should state something that is false? They think it is bad that the MOH asked Health NZ to remove false information from their website?

Also, I see there is reference and a link to the recent CCSA publication, Which the site states “the following are more recent guidelines from other jurisdictions: ‘Canada’s Guidance on Alcohol and Health’ “. While this information had been widely publicised. The Canadian official advise has not changed, nor does it reference this advice. I’m concerned the way it is presented on the Alcohol.org.nz site is somewhat misleading.

And again asking for the website to contain accurate information – that the Canadian proposed guidelines are not officially adopted, and shouldn’t be referred to as such.

In Canada there is an outfit called the Canadian Centre for Substance Abuse and Addiction. They have proposed new guidelines but the Government of Canada has not accepted their proposed guidelines.

This story shows the significant controversy over the CCSA proposed guidelines. They state:

While the CCSA is a federally-funded research organization, it is not a branch of the civil service. As such, its work does not automatically come with an official imprimatur. Rather, its reports have to be adopted by Health Canada or another department to become government policy. This was the case with its 2011 guidance. It is not the case with CCSA’s new report.

In response to a query from C2C, Yuval Daniel, director of communications for Ya’ara Saks, the federal minister of Mental Health and Addictions, stated that, “The Canadian Centre for Substance Abuse and Addiction’s proposed guidelines have not been adopted by the Government of Canada. Canada’s 2011 low-risk alcohol drinking guidelines remain the official guidance.”

Note of this has been mentioned by Radio NZ. Top the contrary they have falsely reported the CCSA proposed guidelines as official guidance.

I have quoted all the e-mails in full, except for salutations etc. Unlike Radio NZ, I don’t selectively edit them to appear conspirational.