Latest news with #EducationandTrainingAct2020
Scoop
01-07-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
ACT Party Tried To Get Treaty Of Waitangi Clause Removed From Education Legislation
The ACT Party fought to have a Treaty of Waitangi clause stripped out of amended education legislation - but was overruled. ACT leader David Seymour says not removing it entirely has "certainly created some controversy", but it was "simply political". The prime minister is defending the decision because the government wants clarity around these clauses, and wants to deal with it in a "comprehensive and coordinated way" as part of a wider review. The Education and Training Amendment Bill tweaks Section 127 of the Act from 2020 - which outlines how schools operate in the country - to update what the "paramount objective", or highest priority objective, is for boards governing schools. It was part of the ACT and National coalition agreement which sets out to "amend the Education and Training Act 2020 to enshrine educational attainment as the paramount objective for state schools". The Education and Training Act currently outlines a board's primary objectives in governing a school was to ensure every student can "attain their highest possible standard in educational achievement"; the school is "physically and emotionally" safe; that it includes and caters for students with differing needs; and "gives effect to Te Tiriti of Waitangi". It specified it must do that by: (i) working to ensure that its plans, policies, and local curriculum reflect local tikanga Māori, mātauranga Māori, and te ao Māori; and (ii) taking all reasonable steps to make instruction available in tikanga Māori and te reo Māori; and (iii) achieving equitable outcomes for Māori students. The Amendment Bill changes Section 127 so the "paramount objective" is first and foremost to "ensure that every student at the school is able to attain their highest possible standard in educational achievement". To meet that objective, the board must also meet "supporting objectives" such as those outlined in the original legislation, including the clause to give effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, and other objectives around school attendance and evaluating students' progress and achievement. The order of the Tiriti o Waitangi clause was also slightly changed, so the "achieving equitable outcomes" came first. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said "it might sound odd to have to say this" but it was necessary for boards to have a "number one priority on advancing academic achievement". "So that's job number one." Seymour agreed, saying the ACT Party campaigned on putting academic achievement "front and centre." He said these changes will ensure that academic achievement is the paramount objective. "The Act Party has long felt that we have not had an adequate emphasis on just simply making sure that valuable academic knowledge is transferred from one generation to the next." He said there had been "a lot of disquiet" the requirement to uphold the Treaty had not been removed. He claimed parents "frequently complain" their children were spending time on subjects and activities that have no value to them, but "appear to be part of a wider political project to change the culture of New Zealand". He said that was a source of "enormous anger" and parents wanted their children focused on "reading, writing and arithmetic". He rejected the notion the removal of that clause was itself a political project, saying "there's no political project in wanting children to learn only things that are valuable to them". Seymour said he would not reveal any kind of "cabinet or other private discussion", but that people can "probably guess" the ACT Party would want to remove a clause like that. The reason for not removing it was "simply political" he said, "not all political parties agree with the removal". "Perhaps other parties were less eager to hence, it remains, but will be reviewed as part of the government's wider treaty clauses reviewed." When asked about the differences between National and ACT, Seymour said the National Party would always explain itself as a "broad church". Luxon refused to say who pushed back on ACT's proposal, saying it was simply a "series of conversations that happen in cabinet and cabinet committees". Luxon said there was a set of questions around treaty obligations and the implications within legislation. He explained the government had a broader piece of work to outline specific treaty clauses rather than "general, open ended" ones so "everyone has maximum clarity about how a piece of legislation is to be operationalised". As a result he said the clause would be considered as part of that review. He said the most important thing was to make sure boards understand the priority was getting kids to school, teaching them maths and teaching them to read. Education Minister Erica Stanford told RNZ "legitimate questions" were raised regarding the existing Treaty clause in section 127 of the Education Act during the Cabinet process in August last year. She said Cabinet agreed to include the section 127 treaty clause, along with many other references to the treaty in the Education Act, in the wider review the Justice Minister was undertaking. "This process of reviewing the whole Education Act at once was seen as a more coherent approach to ensure consistency of decision making rather than considering Treaty clauses on an ad hoc basis." The Amendment Bill is currently at select committee stage. Submissions close on 12 June and a report is due back in September.
1News
19-06-2025
- Politics
- 1News
Co-ed principals fight 'unethical' boys school-only rugby competition
A group of South Island principals is rallying against what it claims are "discriminatory and unlawful" plans for a breakaway first XV rugby competition played exclusively among boys' schools. A collective of South Island boys' schools last month confirmed talks were underway to launch a new first XV competition as part of wider collaborative efforts to improve educational outcomes for young men. The new competition would include up to eight boys' schools across Canterbury and Tasman, and five schools in Otago and Southland. The move has been met with widespread concern from leaders of co-educational schools in those regions, who fear the "devastating" impact on their school communities if top-flight rugby were restricted to a select group of schools. A highly organised resistance began in earnest on Wednesday, when a letter signed by principals of more than 40 schools was sent to the South Island provincial rugby unions and NZ Rugby urging the sport's leaders to act. RNZ understands a separate, individual complaint has also been laid with the Sport Integrity Commission. The letter to the rugby bodies called on officials to step in and "help intervene in what would become a highly destructive competition" for both the sport, the wider education system and young people. "Excluding boys in co-educational schools from top-level rugby against boys-only schools would undermine the inclusivity, competitiveness, and health of school rugby, harming the sport's future and the well-being of its players," the letter states. The letter also raised concerns that the proposal "is driven by the desire to attract the best athletes to the boys' schools for their own success", creating an "arms race where schools aggressively recruit top players". The morning's headlines in 90 seconds including what will happen to food after supermarket blaze, Trump's dithering over the Middle East, and winter car care tips. (Source: 1News) One of the signatories to the letter, Darfield High School principal Andy England, said he believed the proposal was "unjustified and discriminatory". "I think this move, if it was to happen, would be deeply unethical, potentially in breach of human rights, and the education and training act. Which are strong words to say, and I get that. But I'm saying them," England told RNZ. Asked if the schools would consider laying a complaint with the Human Rights Commission or the Ministry of Education, England responded: "Yes." "At the end of the day, it just seems deeply unfair that boys who go to school with girls are excluded from playing the sport at the level that suits them. How can that be right under the Human Rights Act or under the Education and Training Act?" The Education and Training Act 2020 requires schools to ensure a safe and inclusive environment and to eliminate discrimination, which extends to sports participation. England said his main frustration was that there had been "very limited communication from the boys' schools" about why they wanted to form a breakaway competition and how it would work. Rugby officials needed to show leadership and get all the schools around the table "in a reasonably assertive way", so they can work on a solution together. "I think we're all looking for some guidance from [the] rugby union. My speciality isn't rugby at all, but I can't see how this could be good for rugby. It's inevitable that some rugby talent will be lost through this if this goes ahead," he said. "It also puts rugby development at the top level into the hands of the boys schools only, and how can that be healthy?" The letter claims the collective of boys' schools plan to launch the new competition for 2026 on August 1. However, two principals involved told RNZ there are no firm plans or commitments in place. Steve Hart, principal of St Thomas of Canterbury College, said he was aware of opposition to the proposed new competition, but he did not think it was appropriate to address those criticisms through the media. "Until there is something concrete to discuss, I don't know how healthy the back and forward actually is," he said. "Probably for me I think there's been an over-focus on rugby here, that's actually a tiny bit of what we're trying to do. It probably sums up New Zealand a wee bit in that we focus too much on rugby and people are missing the point on what the actual vision here is." Hart referred RNZ to the statement provided to media at the time the plans for the breakaway competition were first raised, which noted the collective's aims of "exploring initiatives that include the arts, culture, sport and professional learning - designed to foster connection, belonging and pride among our young men". Canterbury Rugby chief executive Tony Smail said his organisation shared some of the concerns of the co-ed schools about the proposed competition. "The unintended and intended consequences of a standalone competition among boys' schools needs to be talked about. There is genuine concern that pathways are being closed for other rugby playing participants out there," he said. "You'll have player movement out of the schools that aren't in the competition into the schools that are, and the flow on effect of that is huge. If you have one or two strong players from one school decide to leave, the risk is that their peers that are left at that school will give up, because they were staying in the game to play with their mates." While the union sits on the governance group of the current first XV competition, which involves schools in the Crusaders' catchment area, it is not in charge of running schoolboy rugby. However, Smail acknowledged Canterbury Rugby has a duty to work through the issues with all schools. He said he hopes to get the principals together in the coming weeks. "We'd obviously love to find a way to break through and understand what those problem areas are that require the boys' schools to head off and see if there's another alternative that we can explore together," said Smail. "What we've had among the schools are some pretty brave conversations at times, and I think this is another example where we have to get together, hear out all sides and see if there's another way through." NZ Rugby's general manager of community rugby Steve Lancaster said while the national body does not control the governance or delivery of the secondary school competitions, it does have an interest in the potential implications the proposed breakaway competition may have on "participation, equity and the schools that are excluded". "We know many stakeholders look to NZR for resolution of such issues; however, we do not have authority over school competitions that are organised outside of Provincial Union administration. That said, we remain committed to advocating for inclusive, competitive, and accessible rugby pathways for all young people, regardless of the type of school they attend." A spokesperson for the Sport Integrity Commission said the organisation could not confirm the existence or otherwise of any complaints before the organisation.
The Spinoff
09-06-2025
- Politics
- The Spinoff
The problem with making ‘educational attainment' the key objective for schools
Honouring a promise in the National-Act coalition agreement, a bill that proposes to demote the place of te Tiriti in the official objectives for state schools is part of a concerning wider pattern, argues Jessie Moss. At first glance, it might look straightforward. The government's Education and Training Amendment Bill (No 2) proposes to 'enshrine educational attainment as the paramount objective for state schools'. But scratch the surface of the bill, on which submissions close this week, and you quickly start asking, educational attainment for whom? Spoiler alert: it's not Māori or disabled tamariki. It all gets alarming in section 127, which sets out the objectives for school boards in governing state and state-integrated kura and schools. That's where the government pulls apart education's current focus on inclusive, authentic, localised and culturally affirming schooling for all tamariki. You can trace it back to Act's coalition deal with National. Act wanted (and National agreed to) 'amend the Education and Training Act 2020 to enshrine educational attainment as the paramount objective for state schools'. And so here we are, with almost that same wording typed into this bill. The problem is that by promoting one objective as 'paramount', you demote all others – and the objectives we currently have are pretty bloody important. They are: That every student is able to attain their highest possible standard in educational achievement. That schools are safe for students and staff and give effect to the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 and the Human Rights Act 1993. And, that they take steps to eliminate racism, stigma, bullying and other discrimination. That schools are inclusive of and cater for students with 'differing needs'. And, critically, that schools give effect to te Tiriti o Waitangi. Educators, disability rights groups and Māori fought to have the current objectives introduced in order to reverse the equity gap and address institutional racism and ableism in education. The Act Party has no record of evidence-based education policy, but it does have a record of protesting loudly against te Tiriti and equity-based approaches. When this bill was first proposed in October last year, Māori, as well those working in education and children's rights, scrutinised it and then tried to stop this rollback. The Ministry of Education's summary of consultation on the bill (prior to it heading to select committee) shows 80.5% of submitters opposed giving one objective 'paramount' status. Submitters said, 'educational achievement [was] already a key focus of schools and their core responsibility'. They felt the bill's changes 'would deprioritise the other objectives' and 'undermine the requirement to give effect to Te Tiriti'. These submissions explained what should be obvious; that educational achievement can't occur without focus on te Tiriti o Waitangi, inclusion and wellbeing. The consultation on the bill also proposed removing 'unnecessary references' to the Human Rights Act and the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act in the objectives. It was only submissions by Māori, educators and disability rights groups that saved the references. As for demoting te Tiriti o Waitangi? Educator Kārena Ngata puts it simply: 'Our obligations to te Tiriti o Waitangi should be realised in every aspect of the school's systems, policies and practices.' Māori tino rangatiratanga over Māori education has been sidelined, and the bill also weakens schools' responsibilities for engaging with mana whenua and local communities. Given the impact for Māori, you'd expect consultation would be solid, but the Regulatory Impact Statement for the bill said otherwise, noting there was 'inadequate time for comprehensive consultation with Māori, iwi and hapū'. Once again, the government has decided on a timeframe too short for real engagement. Zoom out and this bill is just part of a wider pattern emerging in education. This government has already downgraded te Tiriti in the New Zealand curriculum, scrapped Te Ahu o Te Reo Māori language programme for teachers, and defunded resource teachers of Māori. So, strap in, because here we go again. The government is taking another crack at putting Māori second in education. And that diminishes education for us all.
Scoop
21-05-2025
- Business
- Scoop
Have Your Say On The Education And Training (Vocational Education And Training System) Amendment Bill
Press Release – The Education and Workforce Committee The bill seeks to redesign the vocational education and training system to restore regional decision-making. It also aims to increase industry involvement in vocational education and training. The Education and Workforce Committee is calling for submissions on the Education and Training (Vocational Education and Training System) Amendment Bill with a closing date of 11:59pm on 18 June 2025. The bill seeks to redesign the vocational education and training system to restore regional decision-making. It also aims to increase industry involvement in vocational education and training. The bill would do so by amending the Education and Training Act 2020 to: • disestablish Te Pūkenga—New Zealand Institute of Skills and Technology (Te Pūkenga) • re-establish a network of regional polytechnics • establish industry skills boards to replace workforce development councils. The bill would propose a framework within which new polytechnics and a Polytechnic Federation Committee can be established, as well as framework to establish industry skills boards. The frameworks would set out the characteristics and functions of the new entities, the process for their establishment and disestablishment, and the technical elements necessary for them to function. The bill would also enable Te Pūkenga to remain as a transitional entity for unallocated programmes and activities for a 1-year period after commencement. Make a submission on the bill by 11:59pm on Wednesday, 18 June 2025.
Scoop
21-05-2025
- Business
- Scoop
Have Your Say On The Education And Training (Vocational Education And Training System) Amendment Bill
The Education and Workforce Committee is calling for submissions on the Education and Training (Vocational Education and Training System) Amendment Bill with a closing date of 11:59pm on 18 June 2025. The bill seeks to redesign the vocational education and training system to restore regional decision-making. It also aims to increase industry involvement in vocational education and training. The bill would do so by amending the Education and Training Act 2020 to: • disestablish Te Pūkenga—New Zealand Institute of Skills and Technology (Te Pūkenga) • re-establish a network of regional polytechnics • establish industry skills boards to replace workforce development councils. The bill would propose a framework within which new polytechnics and a Polytechnic Federation Committee can be established, as well as framework to establish industry skills boards. The frameworks would set out the characteristics and functions of the new entities, the process for their establishment and disestablishment, and the technical elements necessary for them to function. The bill would also enable Te Pūkenga to remain as a transitional entity for unallocated programmes and activities for a 1-year period after commencement. Make a submission on the bill by 11:59pm on Wednesday, 18 June 2025.
