logo
Schools Are Struggling To Recruit New Board Members As Deadlines Loom

Schools Are Struggling To Recruit New Board Members As Deadlines Loom

Scoop4 days ago
Schools around the country are struggling to recruit new board members, with deadlines looming.
Just 2000 parents have applied across 10,000 soon-to-be empty school board positions.
New Zealand Rural Schools Leadership Association president Andrew King told Nine to Noon schools were getting desperate.
"I don't know that we've ever been in a year where it's been so hard in terms of actively needing to recruit," he said.
"Lots of shoulder tapping, asking current board members to stay on for another term... That's becoming more and more prevalent."
King speculated as more households were running on dual incomes, both parents felt too busy to accept a board position.
"There are huge numbers of working families where mum and dad are both having to work," he said.
"From a rural schools perspective, there's a lot of farming community people who think 'well I'm so busy at these times of the year, calving season and so forth, that I can't commit to coming to meetings and working groups so I just won't put my name forward,' too many people trying to make ends meet."
Meredith Kennett, president of NZ School Boards Association, noted schools were not alone in struggling to recruit New Zealanders.
"It is concerning and probably a mark of the times. We're not the only ones experiencing this, with the news of local body elections struggling to get nominations as well," she said.
"It might be reflective of where we're at as a society, but I do think the number will rise and traditionally it does rise in the last few days of nominations."
Andrew King also explained that parents may be unwilling to take on the responsibility of being a board member.
"Should anything go wrong at a school the board is responsible, obviously your principal is the day-to-day manager and theoretically you can have faith and trust that your principal will be putting everything in place, but a really important role of the board is governance and a big part of governance is knowing about everything that's going on.
"And just understanding everything that's going on is a big job in itself."
Social media complicated that further, Kennett said.
"The general sense of divisiveness at the moment, the worry of a person putting themselves out to stand for something publicly. It means you're risking someone having a go at you," she explained.
"Your local Facebook page might have a go at you if something happens within the school, and schools and school boards are pretty careful about what they might say publicly so therefore they might not respond to something which means you can look like you're not engaging."
Meanwhile, compensation was slim.
"It's about [$55] a meeting, and I don't think that's changed for about 20 years. In rural communities where parents might have to be driving 30 to 50 kilometres to get to the meeting each night it doesn't even cover mileage really," King said.
Kennett clarified the $55 allowance was not set in stone.
"Boards actually do have the ability to set their own payment rate. So the $55 dollars come from... If you're on a school board up to $55 is non-taxable, so that's an allowance payment for volunteering, basically," she said.
"At NZSBA we don't see it as a volunteer role... So boards can set the rates differently."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Leak suggests minister's U-turn on alcohol sales reform
Leak suggests minister's U-turn on alcohol sales reform

Otago Daily Times

time8 minutes ago

  • Otago Daily Times

Leak suggests minister's U-turn on alcohol sales reform

By Guyon Espiner of RNZ A leaked Cabinet paper shows the government was planning to restrict the hours bottle stores and supermarkets could sell alcohol but then backed away to focus on reforms more friendly to the alcohol industry. The Associate Justice Minister - ACT's Nicole McKee - is reforming the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act and had said that part of her focus would be reducing alcohol harm, which currently costs the country $9.1 billion a year. But documents leaked to RNZ, including a draft Cabinet paper, suggest the minister is now switching the focus of her reforms to making business easier for the alcohol industry. The documents show McKee initially proposed to change off-licence sale hours, from the current 7am to 11pm, to only allow alcohol sales between 9am and 9pm. The draft Cabinet paper says restricting opening hours could have had a major impact on violent crime - preventing 2400 "violent victimisations" each year. But that move has now been axed. A Ministry of Justice email, also leaked to RNZ, shows justice officials "were directed by Minister McKee to proceed with speed to lodge a revised Cabinet paper" to go before a Cabinet committee on August 13. "The focus of the paper had changed during negotiations - it is now on reducing regulatory burden with some of the harm reduction measures no longer included - e.g. reducing maximum default trading hours." McKee told RNZ it was regrettable her draft Cabinet paper was leaked. "I won't be discussing a few cherry-picked parts of a draft paper through the media before I've even had an opportunity to discuss the issue with my Cabinet colleagues," she said in a statement to RNZ. "I am extremely disappointed that a draft Cabinet paper has been shared with media. This undermines the integrity of the public service and erodes New Zealanders' trust in public servants." 'Strong correlation' between off-licence opening hours and violent crime The leaks show that in an early version of her Cabinet paper, McKee proposed to restrict bottle store opening hours to between 9am and 9pm in a bid to reduce violent crime. "I am focused on hazardous drinking which can lead to violent crime. Evidence shows a strong correlation between later opening hours for off-licences and violent crime," the Cabinet paper originally said. "Ministry of Justice analysis indicates that bringing forward the closing hour to 9pm could see up to 2400 fewer violent victimisations annually." The paper said restricting opening hours would reduce sales revenue for off-licences, as about 20 percent of sales were made between 8pm and 11pm and about 2 percent before 9am. The paper originally said the impacts on business had been "weighed carefully" against the benefits of reducing violent crime. But the leaks show this was changed in a later version. "I am not proposing any changes to the maximum trading hours for licence holders," McKee wrote in the updated paper, noting Auckland and Christchurch had already set a 9pm closing time under their Local Alcohol Policies. "I consider that this is sufficient to manage concerns around licence hours." Focus now on 'reducing red tape' for law-abiding businesses McKee would not be interviewed by RNZ, but confirmed her reforms would now focus on making it easier for businesses in the alcohol industry. "My focus is on reducing red tape restricting businesses and New Zealanders who play by the rules. The law Labour left us with is a mess," she said. The draft Cabinet paper obtained by RNZ shows McKee is now proposing to make it easier for clubs and bars to serve alcohol outside normal trading hours when screening major sport or cultural events. McKee's Cabinet paper also proposes giving the alcohol industry more power when faced with objections to liquor licences. The paper says changes in 2023 allowed any person or group to oppose a liquor licence but that McKee wants to overturn this so objections only come from the community impacted. "To better balance community voice and impacts on business I seek agreement to only allow objections to licensing applications by people or groups and organisations in the same territorial authority as the premises." There are also moves to protect businesses impacted by changes to a council's Local Alcohol Policy (LAP) - where communities determine when and how alcohol is sold. "To protect existing businesses if a LAP is adopted or amended I also seek agreement to prevent a DLC (District Licensing Committee) from declining a renewal application if the licence would be inconsistent with the relevant LAP." The changes would also give applicants for a liquor licence a right of reply to objections received in DLC hearings. Andrew Galloway, executive director of Alcohol Healthwatch, funded by the Ministry of Health, said reducing trading hours for bottle stores and supermarkets would have had a major impact on reducing alcohol harm. "Off-licences sell over 80 percent of alcohol in Aotearoa and these off-licences are over-concentrated in the most deprived areas. Restricting off-licence supply of alcohol would be especially important in reducing alcohol-related harm." Galloway said that when he became aware the government was looking at restricting off-licence trading hours he said to his team "we should prepare for a U-turn" once industry lobbying swung into action. "We will continue to miss every meaningful opportunity to reduce or prevent alcohol harm in New Zealand if we continue to allow unbridled access to power for harmful commodity industries."

Cabinet paper leak suggests Minister Nicole McKee's U-turn on alcohol sales reform
Cabinet paper leak suggests Minister Nicole McKee's U-turn on alcohol sales reform

NZ Herald

time2 hours ago

  • NZ Herald

Cabinet paper leak suggests Minister Nicole McKee's U-turn on alcohol sales reform

The draft Cabinet paper says restricting opening hours could have had a major impact on violent crime – preventing 2400 'violent victimisations' each year. But that move has now been axed. A Ministry of Justice email, also leaked to RNZ, shows justice officials 'were directed by Minister McKee to proceed with speed to lodge a revised Cabinet paper' to go before a Cabinet committee on August 13. 'The focus of the paper had changed during negotiations - it is now on reducing regulatory burden with some of the harm reduction measures no longer included - e.g. reducing maximum default trading hours.' McKee told RNZ it was regrettable her draft Cabinet paper was leaked. 'I won't be discussing a few cherry-picked parts of a draft paper through the media before I've even had an opportunity to discuss the issue with my Cabinet colleagues,' she said in a statement to RNZ. 'I am extremely disappointed that a draft Cabinet paper has been shared with media. This undermines the integrity of the public service and erodes New Zealanders' trust in public servants.' 'Strong correlation' between off-licence opening hours and violent crime The leaks show that in an early version of her Cabinet paper, McKee proposed to restrict bottle store opening hours to between 9am and 9pm in a bid to reduce violent crime. 'I am focused on hazardous drinking which can lead to violent crime. Evidence shows a strong correlation between later opening hours for off-licenses and violent crime,' the Cabinet paper originally said. 'Ministry of Justice analysis indicates that bringing forward the closing hour to 9pm could see up to 2400 fewer violent victimisations annually.' The paper said restricting opening hours would reduce sales revenue for off-licences, as about 20% of sales were made between 8pm and 11pm and about 2% before 9am. The paper originally said the impacts on business had been 'weighed carefully' against the benefits of reducing violent crime. But the leaks show this was changed in a later version. 'I am not proposing any changes to the maximum trading hours for license holders,' McKee wrote in the updated paper, noting Auckland and Christchurch had already set a 9pm closing time under their Local Alcohol Policies. 'I consider that this is sufficient to manage concerns around license hours.' Focus now on 'reducing red tape' for law-abiding businesses McKee would not be interviewed by RNZ, but confirmed her reforms would now focus on making it easier for businesses in the alcohol industry. 'My focus is on reducing red tape restricting businesses and New Zealanders who play by the rules. The law Labour left us with is a mess,' she said. The draft Cabinet paper obtained by RNZ shows McKee is now proposing to make it easier for clubs and bars to serve alcohol outside normal trading hours when screening major sport or cultural events. McKee's Cabinet paper also proposes giving the alcohol industry more power when faced with objections to liquor licences. The paper says changes in 2023 allowed any person or group to oppose a liquor licence but that McKee wants to overturn this so objections only come from the community impacted. 'To better balance community voice and impacts on business I seek agreement to only allow objections to licensing applications by people or groups and organisations in the same territorial authority as the premises.' There are also moves to protect businesses impacted by changes to a council's Local Alcohol Policy (LAP) – where communities determine when and how alcohol is sold. 'To protect existing businesses if a LAP is adopted or amended I also seek agreement to prevent a DLC (District Licensing Committee) from declining a renewal application if the license would be inconsistent with the relevant LAP.' The changes would also give applicants for a liquor licence a right of reply to objections received in DLC hearings. Andrew Galloway, executive director of Alcohol Healthwatch, funded by the Ministry of Health, said reducing trading hours for bottle stores and supermarkets would have had a major impact on reducing alcohol harm. 'Off-licences sell over 80% of alcohol in Aotearoa and these off-licences are over-concentrated in the most deprived areas. Restricting off-licence supply of alcohol would be especially important in reducing alcohol-related harm.' Galloway said that when he became aware the Government was looking at restricting off-licence trading hours, he said to his team 'we should prepare for a U-turn' once industry lobbying swung into action. 'We will continue to miss every meaningful opportunity to reduce or prevent alcohol harm in New Zealand if we continue to allow unbridled access to power for harmful commodity industries.' -RNZ

Making heated tobacco products cheaper than cigarettes is no scandal
Making heated tobacco products cheaper than cigarettes is no scandal

Newsroom

time4 hours ago

  • Newsroom

Making heated tobacco products cheaper than cigarettes is no scandal

Opinion: The Government's decision to introduce a lower excise rate for heated tobacco products (HTPs) has been widely framed as 'giving tax breaks to tobacco companies'. It's a provocative line – and politically potent – but it doesn't help us have an honest, evidence-informed discussion about how to reduce smoking harm, particularly for the most disadvantaged New Zealanders, or how to deal with conflicts of interest. Let's be clear: this isn't a corporate subsidy, so long as the reduced tax is passed on with cheaper products. It's an excise adjustment applied to a class of tobacco products that heat rather than burn tobacco. (Like vaping products, HTPs are marketed as smoke-free alternatives to cigarettes, but are not the same thing.) Combustion is what makes smoking lethal. Cigarettes burn at over 800C, releasing thousands of toxic compounds. Heated tobacco products operate at much lower temperatures and don't produce smoke – just an aerosol – with far fewer harmful constituents. That distinction matters. The multinational tobacco company Philip Morris does hold a monopoly over HTPs in New Zealand. That's not ideal, but it doesn't mean the tax policy exists for Philip Morris International. The intention is to make a less harmful product more affordable than cigarettes – a principle long accepted in tobacco harm reduction, and already applied to vaping. Unfortunately, it appears Philip Morris International hasn't yet passed on the tax savings to the small number of HTP users in New Zealand – this is the real scandal. In addition, the apparent impact of PMI on government policy is tough to ignore, and contrary to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which seeks to protect government policy from tobacco industry influence. New Zealand has rightly taxed cigarettes heavily to deter use. But excise taxes are also regressive. The remaining people who smoke – fewer than 7 percent of adults – are disproportionately Māori, Pasifika, low-income, and more likely to experience mental health distress. The associate minister of health, Casey Costello, justified the excise differential by citing relative harm reduction and the growing inequity of uniform excise. Her reasoning deserves more attention than it has been given. Critics argue there's insufficient evidence that HTPs help people quit, but the UK Office for Health Improvement and Disabilities, the UK Committee on Toxicity, and the US Food and Drug Administration all acknowledge HTPs reduce exposure to toxicants compared with cigarettes. That doesn't make them harmless – but being less harmful than smoking is enough to warrant a differential tax. The example of Japan is instructive. There, HTPs make up over 30 percent of tobacco sales. Though vaping is banned, cigarette consumption has plummeted by 40 percent in some markets. Surveys suggest many smokers switched completely to HTPs. Youth uptake has been minimal. No policy is perfect, but that's a shift in the right direction. What's really at stake here? Not a tax break for big tobacco – but increasing the options for people who smoke and want to quit, and whether we believe in a response to nicotine products based on their comparative risks to human health as a foundation for public health policy. A more productive debate would ask: • Are they less harmful than cigarettes, and do they help smokers quit? • Are tax savings being passed on to consumers? • Are HTPs being promoted responsibly? • Will there be an independent evaluation of their impact on smoking rates? In a country that leads the world with its Smokefree 2025 goal, we should be asking how to accelerate the decline in smoking, not defending a one-size-fits-all excise regime that's increasingly disconnected from the realities of risk, behaviour, and equity. If HTPs can help some people switch, pricing them appropriately is not a scandal. It's a good policy – provided it's transparent, monitored, and grounded in evidence, and the tax savings are passed on to consumers.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store