Latest news with #EducationandTrainingAmendmentBill
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.
Scoop
11-06-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Academic Freedom Legislation Important Step To Save Universities From Themselves
Research by the Free Speech Union and others clearly shows that academic freedom is in jeopardy in New Zealand, despite being enshrined in the Education and Training Act. Universities are not currently doing the job theyre legally obliged and publicly … The Inter-University Council on Academic Freedom (IUCAF), a subcommittee of the Free Speech Union, submitted today in support of the Education and Training Amendment Bill (No 2) 2025. The submission commends key strengths and provides several recommendations to ensure academic freedom is protected in New Zealand universities, says Professor Paul Moon, Co-Chairperson of IUCAF. 'Academic freedom is essential for universities to uphold if academics and students are to speak freely. We welcome the Education and Training Amendment Bill, which the Free Speech Union contributed to extensively, to protect and enable academics and students to speak without fear of retribution. 'Research by the Free Speech Union and others clearly shows that academic freedom is in jeopardy in New Zealand, despite being enshrined in the Education and Training Act. Universities are not currently doing the job they're legally obliged and publicly funded to do. 'We welcome the introduction of duties on universities to protect and promote academic freedom. We commend that the Bill would prevent universities from denying speakers based on controversial or unpopular opinions, and the introduction of annual reporting requirements. 'To ensure the Bill has the full effect of enhancing academic freedom in New Zealand, we have several recommendations. We've proposed that free speech policies avoid language that could actually limit speech, that a clear definition of 'institutional neutrality' is provided to avoid misunderstanding, and that annual reports be made publicly available. 'A culture of fear on our campuses has prevailed for too long. This is the reinforcement universities need to once again return to fostering open dialogue and debate.'
Scoop
11-06-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Academic Freedom Legislation Important Step To Save Universities From Themselves
The Inter-University Council on Academic Freedom (IUCAF), a subcommittee of the Free Speech Union, submitted today in support of the Education and Training Amendment Bill (No 2) 2025. The submission commends key strengths and provides several recommendations to ensure academic freedom is protected in New Zealand universities, says Professor Paul Moon, Co-Chairperson of IUCAF. 'Academic freedom is essential for universities to uphold if academics and students are to speak freely. We welcome the Education and Training Amendment Bill, which the Free Speech Union contributed to extensively, to protect and enable academics and students to speak without fear of retribution. 'Research by the Free Speech Union and others clearly shows that academic freedom is in jeopardy in New Zealand, despite being enshrined in the Education and Training Act. Universities are not currently doing the job they're legally obliged and publicly funded to do. 'We welcome the introduction of duties on universities to protect and promote academic freedom. We commend that the Bill would prevent universities from denying speakers based on controversial or unpopular opinions, and the introduction of annual reporting requirements. 'To ensure the Bill has the full effect of enhancing academic freedom in New Zealand, we have several recommendations. We've proposed that free speech policies avoid language that could actually limit speech, that a clear definition of 'institutional neutrality' is provided to avoid misunderstanding, and that annual reports be made publicly available. 'A culture of fear on our campuses has prevailed for too long. This is the reinforcement universities need to once again return to fostering open dialogue and debate.'
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
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Report Shows Govt's Callous Lack Of Support For System At Breaking Point
Press Release – Green Party The Greens plan lays out real solutions. As a starting point: nationalising ECE, expanding free school lunches, and building a learning support system where every child belongs, says Green Party Education Spokesperson, Lawrence Xu-Nan. A new report from Aotearoa Educators' Collective, released today, has confirmed what teachers, students, and whanau have been calling out for years–our learning support system is overstretched, underfunded, and simply not working. 'This report paints a stark picture of systemic strain, with those working in learning support being pushed to breaking point,' says Green Party Education Spokesperson, Lawrence Xu-Nan. 'Education should serve the wellbeing and potential of all mokopuna—not just those whose needs align with the status quo. We have all the tools we need to give them that and more, but it requires serious investment and support for our workforce. 'However, the Government is intent on making cosmetic tweaks, like fragmented and reactive funding, while ignoring the core issue: the system was never set up to work properly in the first place. 'Every announcement to date from this coalition has tinkered around the edges to make the numbers look prettier, rather than prompting genuine change that benefits our tamariki, their whānau, kaiako, kaimahi, and the wider communities. 'Today's report shows decades of neglect, growing pressure, and a workforce pushed to breaking point. The Government's cancellation of 33 pay equity claims–many of which affect teachers and support staff–makes it blatantly clear they're not serious about fixing it. 'Further, the new Education and Training Amendment Bill completely fails to recognise the actual need of our education system. 'The Greens' plan lays out real solutions. As a starting point: nationalising ECE, expanding free school lunches, and building a learning support system where every child belongs. 'Our plan will put children's wellbeing at the centre of decision-making and policy, where it should have been all along,' says Lawrence Xu-Nan. Notes: The report can be found in full here. Learning support can be defined as '… the systems, services, and personnel designed to ensure that all mokopuna—including those with neurodivergence, disabilities, health needs, or experiences of trauma—can access, participate in, and progress through the curriculum on an equitable basis.' (Beyond Capacity: Learning Support in Crisis, p.5).
