I’m going to buy one of the English Rugby team’s alternative black jerseys.
Purely so I can pour kerosene on it and set it on fire.
And no, I’m not over reacting.
Red Alert
Author Archive
Te Tai Tokerau By-Election
Posted by Kelvin Davis on May 1st, 2011There are number of factors to consider regarding the by-election in Te Tai Tokerau. I am discussing options with whanau, Te Tai Tokerau members of the Labour Party, Labour Maori Caucus, Te Kaunihera Maori and the Party leaders.
A decision will be announced later in the week.
Loosen up Anne Tolley
Posted by Kelvin Davis on February 15th, 2011It’s daft it when bureaucratic bullshit gets in the way of helping people.
I’ve had the Special Education spokesperson role for just on two weeks now and I arranged an informal visit with a loose collection of parents in Kaitaia who have children with special needs.
A senior MoE person has instructed his staff not to attend any gatherings if I’m going to be there.
How dumb is that?
How am I supposed to find out what has to be done for this vulnerable sector of society if I’m blocked from talking to a group of people who work with them on the ground?
Is Anne Tolley so paranoid she thinks the government will crumble if I have a conversation with a speech language therapist in Kaitaia?
These people up north are so de-centralised I can guarantee no “state secrets” will be revealed. It’s not like I’m trying to meet with some policy writer in Wellington.
Supporting these children to achieve beyond their potential alongside their families is more important than petty politics.
Anne Tolley needs to loosen up.
Koha charge an embarrassment
Posted by Kelvin Davis on February 3rd, 2011I have to admit to being embarrassed by this $1000 “koha” being asked of media outlets to attend the celebrations on the lower marae at Waitangi.
My reasons:
1. It’s not tikanga Maori (Maori custom) to either ASK for a koha or exclude anyone from a marae. In my last blog I was defending Maori tikanga that was broken by a group of pakeha. Now we have a group of Maori who are breaking Maori tikanga themselves. When we (Maori) trample on our own customs, then it’s a bit rich to expect non-Maori to adhere to them. We create create confusion and double standards. It’s called hypocrisy. It makes it bloody hard as a Maori politician to go out and defend the “Maori way”, when the Maori way these days chops and changes.
The base word of “tikanga” is “tika” meaning “correct” or “right”. Maori should be doing the correct or right thing. In this case they aren’t and in my mind are breaking tikanga and deserve condemnation. Their actions unfortunately reflect on all Maori, and I’m embarrassed. They will find every reason to justify their ‘koha’ charge, but there is only one reason why they shouldn’t charge it – it’s wrong.
If I was the media, I would boycott the lower marae celebrations and focus on all the positive festivities that are happening around Waitangi.
2. Waitangi Day is a day for all New Zealanders to share. Media outlets allow many Maori and non-Maori who would like to be at Waitangi, but can’t be there, to share in the day. Many New Zealanders are already alienated from Waitangi Day, this sort of un-Maori behaviour simply drives people further away.
In my blog ‘Denis responds’ Denis said, “But we must learn to understand and respect each other better and also to live together in harmony.” These people asking for the ‘koha’ make it damn hard for non-Maori to understand and respect Maori and for us all to live in harmony.
Maybe they aren’t interested in harmony.
Denis responds
Posted by Kelvin Davis on February 2nd, 2011So I was rude, abrupt and dismissive of Denis’ opinion. Guilty on all accounts. But he had to be challenged. If he was looking for a sympathetic ear to reinforce his perspective, he emailed the wrong person. However, I believed he did what I hoped he’d do and had a look at the issue from another perspective.
Here’s his response, which I didn’t include in the original “Our nation is becoming unhinged – an email exchange” blog so as not to cloud the debate.
Denis said:
Thank you Kelvin – I appreciate this information and will think it through carefully.
It seems to me Maori and Europeans need to learn more about how each group works and thinks… and learn to respect the important stuff. Perhaps newspaper articles on different aspects of culture?
I think it must work both ways … and how do we solve the problem about people not being able to do things like: walk on top of the mountain if you are a mountain climber and this is something that they normally want to do and other stuff like that?
There must be a way that would be mutually satisfactory. But we must learn to understand and respect each other better and also to live together in harmony … don’t you agree?
It seems you are in a very good position to initiate some new ideas in this direction. That would be fantastic. Again, I appreciate your excellent reply.
Go for it and all the best — Denis
Our nation is becoming unhinged – an email exchange
Posted by Kelvin Davis on January 31st, 2011As MPs we often get email from people expressing their opinion on one subject or another. I got one from ‘Denis’ obviously with an axe to grind about Maori issues. I share it below, sorry it’s a bit long but I’m interested in opinion on both Denis’ perspective and mine.
Subject: Our Nation is Becoming Unhinged
Dear Kelvin
A group of students climbed to the top of Mount Egmont for an ‘epic barbecue’ and also cleared rubbish from the mountain – they were denounced by Maori groups and by DOC for ‘trampling on Maori dignity’. Since when have state institutions been given the mandate to uphold Maori spiritual values and practices? Officially, our secular state has no place for imposing religious or cultural practices on us. One Maori leader claims there are ‘cultural values’ all around the country that should be protected, including all mountain peaks – that people should not even go near the summit of a mountain! Incredible. The bi-cultural movement in New Zealand is subverting democracy, erecting ethnic boundaries between Maori and non-Maori and promoting a cultural elite within Maoridom. Supported by you with policy and finances, it has led to a rapid increase in the rights of Maori over the rest of NZers plus a mountain of race-based policies. You people continue to promote the Maori separatist movement at huge cost for all NZers in terms of loss of assets and resources. This concerns all of us Kiwis. The foreshore and seabed is next with more property and asset takeover down the track. It’s time you folk put the brakes on and governed justly for ALL New Zealanders.
Regards,
Denis
Denis
So you’re telling me your world view should prevail over the Maori world view. Don’t you think your attitude is as exclusive as the ones you criticize? For as long as you hold the views you do some Maori will hold the views they do. You are part of the problem, but none of the solution. You won’t be able to see that though.
Kelvin Davis MP
(more…)
Cambridge exam national standards to be developed
Posted by Kelvin Davis on January 18th, 2011Anne Tolley inextricably linked success in National Standards to success in NCEA when she wrote in a letter to parents, “The standards have been designed so that a student who meets them is on track to succeed at NCEA Level 2.”
National Standards have not been designed so that a student who meets them is on track to succeed at Cambridge Exams.
So what are primary school teachers who contribute pupils to Auckland Grammar going to use to ensure their boys are on track to pass Cambridge Exams?
Without Cambridge Exam National Standards teachers will not be able to tell parents in plain english reports whether their son is achieving at, above or below the level required to pass Cambridge Exams.
If the Minister is consistent she will in the next few weeks develop a separate set of “Cambridge Exam National Standards” and impose them on all the teachers at Epsom Normal School, Mt Eden Normal and Auckland Normal Intermediate School,etc.
These ‘Cambridge Exam National Standards’ are necessary because according to John Morris, Principal of Auckland Grammar School, NCEA would be provided for his weaker students.
The implication is Cambridge exams are harder than NCEA therefore achievement above the regular National Standards expectation is not a guarantee that a student is on track to achieve above the level expected to pass a Cambridge Exam.
If the Minister does not create ‘Cambridge Exam National Standards’ designed so that a student who meets them is on track to succeed at Cambridge Exams, all the arguments she applied to justify the imposition of National Standards can be thrown back in her face.
If she says the regular National Standards will suffice, then we have proof that Cambridge Exams are no better than NCEA.
Is Anne Tolley scared of Auckland Grammar
Posted by Kelvin Davis on January 16th, 2011Auckland Grammar School has refused to implement NCEA.
Many primary schools have refused to implement National Standards.
On the Auckland Grammar issue Education Minister Anne Tolley declined to be interviewed, instead releasing a written statement that she had full confidence in the NCEA qualification.
On the primary schools that refused to implement National Standards Anne Tolley had plenty to say such as, the opposition is driven by unions, teachers and principals afraid of accountability, afraid to change, if these schools break the law she has the ultimate power to replace Boards of Trustees with a commissioner, Principals are manipulating Boards of Trustees, etc.
Auckland Grammar Principal John Morris said, “We are confident the change is in the best interests of all our boys”.
Rebel primary school principals say their refusal to implement National Standards is in the best interests of their pupils.
Putting aside the NCEA v Cambridge let’s focus on the behaviour of the Minister.
If Anne Tolley is to display any measure of consistency in her approach she will now;
- Persecute the principal and teachers of AGS through the media
- Threaten to sack the Board of Trustees and replace them with a commissioner.
- Mount a campaign to inform parents of AGS that NCEA is the best system.
If Auckland Grammar School is allowed to bend the rules without consequence, primary schools who don’t want to implement National Standards should be afforded the same the same courtesy.
Auckland Grammar School has refused to implement NCEA.
Many primary schools have refused to implement National Standards.
On the Auckland Grammar issue Education Minister Anne Tolley declined to be interviewed, instead releasing a written statement that she had full confidence in the NCEA qualification.
On the primary schools that refused to implement National Standards Anne Tolley had plenty to say such as, the opposition is driven by unions, teachers and principals afraid of accountabilty, afraid to change, if these schools break the law she has the ultimate power to replace Boards of Trustees with a comissioner.
Auckland Grammar Principal John Morris said, “We are confident the change is in the best interests of all our boys”.
Rebel primary school principals say their refusal to implement National Standards is in the best interests of their pupils.
Putting aside the NCEA v Cambridge debate or the National Standards debate, why is Anne Tolley’s response so inconsistent?
If she is to display any measure of consistency in her approach she will now;
- Persecute the principal and teachers of AGS through the media
- Threaten to sack the Board of Trustees and replace them with a comissioner.
- Mount a campaign to inform parents of AGS that NCEA is the best system.
If Auckland Grammar School is allowed to bend the rules without consequence, primary schools who don’t want to implement National Standards should be allowed the same the same courtesy.
Marine and Coastal Area select committee hearings
Posted by Kelvin Davis on December 13th, 2010The M?ori Affairs Select Committee hearings for the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill have been interesting.
Labour supported the Bill to Select Committee, but it is the right decision to pull our support. It is almost universally disliked, but for polar opposite reasons.
The submitters can be loosely placed into five camps.
• M?ori opposed to the bill on the grounds it is racist and reduces M?ori rights.
• P?keh? opposed to the bill on the grounds it is racist, and reduces M?ori rights.
• P?keh? opposed to the bill on the grounds it is racist, and increases M?ori rights.
• M?ori Party members who support the bill despite their belief it is racist and reduces M?ori rights, but they know they have to support the M?ori Party.
• Local authorities and businesses concerned how it will affect their operations.
Some of the options open to the M?ori Party and National Party are:
• Pass the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill
• Stick with the current Foreshore and Seabed Act (2004)
• Repeal the Foreshore and Seabed Act (2004) i.e. wind back the clock to post Ng?ti Apa decision but pre Foreshore and Seabed Act.
• Amend the Foreshore and Seabed Act (2004)
• Go back to the drawing board.
M?ori see this as a property rights/ justice issue. P?keh? see this as a race issue.
Everybody wants clarity and certainty. The bill doesn’t provide this. We know the world is going crazy when ACT Party members praise Helen Clark and support Labour Party legislation and raging rednecks and radical Maoris come up with the same solution to a problem, which is to bring a group of people together representing both sides of the argument and thrash out a new solution that is workable. The hearings have revealed an amazing amount of misinformation, racism and stupidity. The Foreshore and Seabed/ Marine and Coastal Area issue is not the cause of a festering wound. It is merely a symptom of a wider disease eating away at the rationality of otherwise decent New Zealanders.
ACT’s foreshore and seabed behest
Posted by Kelvin Davis on October 18th, 2010The Foreshore and Seabed Legislation Part 2, has taken a turn that will disadvantage Maori who have always owned land next to the sea, but not other land owners.
At the ACT Party’s behest, the National Government has agreed to write a clause into the foreshore and seabed bill now before Parliament that will expressly make it unlawful to charge for access to a beach. I need to clarify that – it will make it unlawful for Maori to charge access to a beach, but all private landowners, are exempt. That simply isn’t fair.
I think of my Ngati Rehia relations out Takou Bay (north of Kerikeri) way who have always had ownership of the land adjacent to the beach. I remember in the 1970’s going for Sunday excursions and having to put a koha in a jar next to a gate before heading across Maori land to get to the beach, and fair enough – why should we just be able to just drive over someone else’s property willy nilly and not expect to pay? If I recall properly the sign said the koha was to maintain the private track down to the beach so that cars like our old Holden Belmont could get up and down the hill without any problem.
I also remember how we could head down to the beach at the old Jack and Jill Motorcamp on the way out to Rawhiti in the eastern Bay of Islands. One day we couldn’t because some really rich dude had bought the land up, built a big fence, beautiful gates and subsequently three large mansions on the property (I’m told one for himself, one for visitors and the third for his grandkids so they could party up without disturbing him back in mansion number one).
For decades New Zealanders had made the Jack and Jill Motorcamp and the adjacent beach their summer playland, and now it is no more.
Guess what? The government’s racist legislation means while my Ngati Rehia whanaunga will now be banned from putting out their koha jar at the gate, this multi millionaire at Jack’s Bay is exempt. If he was made to open his flash gate and allow me to cross over his land to walk down to the Foreshore and Seabed with my sunblock, beach towel and pipi kit, he could charge what he liked.
The Foreshore and Seabed Part 2, aka Marine and Coastal Area Bill, agreed to by the National, Maori and ACT Parties, creates a law that shafts Maori but looks after everyone else.
National Standards testing or not?
Posted by Kelvin Davis on October 13th, 2010Written question to Anne Tolley 22/09/10
Q31669: How does the Ministry collate achievement data generated by National Standards testing: is it collated with considerations of ethnicity or socio-economic background?
Answer: There is no National Standards testing
What do teachers make of this assertion? And what do you think is her rationale for such an assertion?
F&S II
Posted by Kelvin Davis on September 19th, 2010The Foreshore and Seabed Part 2 had it’s first reading in the House last week.
Experts such as Moana Jackson and Paul Moon have said that although Maori can now have claims tested in court, the bar is set too high and hapu and iwi will be little better off.
So after all the years of chest beating and foot stomping, the Maori and National Parties have achieved bugger all.
Labour created a benign political environment that left those two parties to sort it all out, and sort it out for good.
Unsurprisingly, every three years the Maori Party are going to bring it up again in post election negotiations.
They are the masters of half-pai politics. Which suits their grievance mentality. Happy Maori don’t need to fan the flames of discontent.
The Maori Party website said that the people were angry because F&S 1 took Tino Rangatiratanga of the F&S away from Maori.
Does F&S 2 return Tino Rangatiratanga? No, but we get “Mana Tuku Iho” instead.
I can’t think of one Maori who was looking for Mana Tuku Iho to be returned? No one even noticed it was missing.
By endorsing F&S 2 the Maori Party are effectively giving up on Tino Rangatiratanga of the F&S for good.
Amazing.
Sadly, while we’ve been engrossed in the F&S sideshow our attention has been diverted from the real action in the lives of Maori. The real action wasn’t happening at Iwi Leaders Forums, Maori Party meetings or any coming together of politicians, officials, iwi and media.
The real action was happening in the homes of Maori mums and dads up and down the country who are just struggling to get a job, pay the rent, pay the bills, educate, feed and clothe the kids and be happy.
It appears we’re more concerned about wet sand than our people.
Neither faith nor hope
Posted by Kelvin Davis on September 19th, 2010ECE have had funding cuts, Adult Education has been decimated, secondary teachers have gone on strike over pay and conditions and the primary sector is starting to turn on itself with Northland principals now openly attacking one another over National Standards.
The education sector is demoralised and angry.
Anne Tolley’s response to criticism is to tell principals to resign if they want to criticise her policies.
Surely if her policies are grounded in research she would have full confidence that they can withstand scrutiny from any quarter?
Or is the fact that Bill English said a few weeks back that in 5-10 years Corrections will be the biggest department an indication that the National Party have no confidence that their education policies will make a difference to outcomes?
Surely the aim of the Minister of Education is to create the conditions where learning is optimised and all students can go on to be successful thus reducing the need for Corrections, MSD, CYFs etc.
She appears to have neither faith in her own ability nor hope for our future.
Performance Pay for Teachers
Posted by Kelvin Davis on August 19th, 2010Anne Tolley spoke to Roger Kerr and mates about education last night. I trotted along for a listen.
Roger Kerr raised the question of performance pay for teachers. Being the audience it was they all thought performance pay is a good thing. There was no discussion about why they thought it was a good thing, just general agreement that it should happen.
The question I have for those who support performance pay for teachers is – which part of a teacher’s performance will they get paid for?
Common sense says teachers should get paid more if they get students to achieve the National Standards.
So what happens in those schools and regions where students enter a classroom at the beginning of the year well below the national standard? Why would a teacher want to teach in a school like that where despite his/her best efforts the student makes heaps of progress but fails to get over the National Standard ‘line’.
It would simply be a business decision for a teacher to teach in a school in a ‘good’ area, where even mediocre teaching can get a student over the standard. This will result in a migration of teachers to ‘easy’ schools and disadvantaged schools would struggle exasperating underachievement.
Digging deeper, what happens if a teacher does get the struggling student over the line in reading and writing, but fails to in maths?
What happens if a teacher gets 24 out of thirty kids over the national standards line, but six students don’t make it? Is the teacher a good teacher or bad teacher? Eighty percent success isn’t too bad, or is it?
Trouble is that figure equates to 1 in 5 students failing.
Let’s dig deeper still, in the maths curriculum there are 5 strands – number, statistics, measurement, algebra and geometry. Is a teacher a good or bad teacher if the student meets an achievement benchmark in algebra, geometry, statistics and measurement – but not number?
Again that is an 80% success rate, achieving in 4 out of 5 strands in the one curriculum area. But we want kids to be able to achieve in numeracy and literacy, and failing in the ‘number’ strand means the student isn’t numerate.
Is a teacher good or bad if they focus on ‘number’ over statistics, algebra, measurement and geometry?
Are we saying these other strands aren’t important?
If my receipt of a performance pay bonus depended on me making sure kids were numerate over statist-erate, or measure-ate, or algeb-rate or geome-rate, I would focus on numeracy – statistics and everything else can go to hell.
And let’s look deeper again. A class of thirty, 5 strands in maths alone, 30 x 5 = 150 targets a teacher has to achieve to be deemed successful, just in maths. Maths is generally taught about 5 hours a week. Bugger that, if my performance pay bonus depends on the class achieving in maths, I’ll dedicate most of the week to that. A balanced curriculum can get stuffed.
That’s not even counting the 4 strands in science (or is science no longer important), 3 strands in technology (or is technology [R&D] no longer important), 5 different styles of writing, oral language, 4 health and PE strands, dance, drama, and other arts strands, languages etc.
How many strands does a teacher have to make sure each student achieves in before s/he deserves a performance bonus?
Multiply the number of students in a class by the number of strands across the curriculum and a single teacher has thousands of performance targets to meet a year.
Then there are all the other things that teachers do besides making kids learn.
Do they deserve performance pay for – 1) doing duty?, 2) coaching sports teams? 3) being associate teachers of student teachers? 4) being tutor teachers for beginning teachers? 5) liaising with parents, whanau and iwi? 6) taking after school music or art classes? 7) after school tutoring? 
leading professional development and appraisal of peers? 9) organising school discos? 10) fundraising? 11) organising the school play? 12) organising the school fair? 13) organising sports trips? 14) organising the school library? 15) organising the swimming sports, athletics day, 40 hour famine, breakfast club, buses, cross country, art exhibition, assemblies, class camps, community problems solving, peer mediators, restorative justice programme, assessment moderation sessions, interschool quality learning circles, professional development programme, etc, etc, etc.
Is the teacher who just teaches, a better or worse teacher than the one who runs around and gets involved in the corporate life of the school?
Common sense would say that the teacher who just focuses on the classroom would get better results, so teachers should just teach. To hell with everything else.
Roger Kerr made the comment, “How hard can it be? Surely schools aren’t that complex?”
I’m interested in the performance pay model Roger has in mind.
Wednesday poll – Vote stripping to lead to drop in crime?
Posted by Kelvin Davis on July 14th, 2010
Loading ...Monday poll – should Tolley have called for research paper to be withdrawn ?
Posted by Kelvin Davis on July 12th, 2010 Loading ...And because book burning Tolley got it taken down from the parliamentary website you can see a copy here.
Oil extraction from the Northland Basin
Posted by Kelvin Davis on July 11th, 2010Lying under 100,000 square kilometres of seabed off the west coast of Northland is an estimated one trillion barrels of oil equivalent.
This is the seabed that shortly no one will own because under the repeal of the Foreshore and Seabed Act it will become “public domain”.
Bids are being sought for “petroleum exploration permits.” (Closing date 18 August)
Maori should have been involved in the process to determine who wins these permits. They haven’t.
This means the Crown alone gets to decide which third party over the next five years, can poke around on the Seabed, looking for oil.
1. The Treaty of Waitangi was a partnership between the Crown and Maori. Maori should be sitting at the table with the Crown participating in the process of making decisions in regards to anything to do with this resource.
They aren’t. The Treaty is still being dishonoured.
2. Under the repeal the F&S no one owns the seabed but the Crown still reserves the right to decide who does what to the Seabed, when its done and where its done.
Sounds like ownership to me.
The Crown will still have the final say therefore the repeal is a joke.
3. Article 19 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People says:
“States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free, prior and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them.”
Free, prior and informed consent has not been obtained.
The United Nations Declaration of Indigenous Rights has been treated with contempt by the Government who endorsed it on the world stage just a couple of months back.
This is a perfect example of why Maori appear to be in a constant state of grievance.
The Treaty has again been dishonoured. The Foreshore and Seabed repeal is a farce . The United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is being treated with contempt.
A contemporary case of Maori being shafted.
Solution?
Involve Maori in the process of allocating oil exploration bids.
Simple.
My guess is that Maori are only too willing to make sure all New Zealanders benefit from the extraction of this resource.
Wednesday poll – Maori charging for foreshore use
Posted by Kelvin Davis on July 7th, 2010 Loading ...