Purely so I can pour kerosene on it and set it on fire.

And no, I’m not over reacting.

A decision will be announced later in the week.

1. We got GSE personnel to observe in classrooms over three days (about 5 hours in total) to note every incident of ‘violence’ (anything from taking a rubber without asking, name calling, pushing, shoving, fighting etc) so that we had baseline data on the extent of the problem. There were 40 incidents in that time.

2. We surveyed all students asking them two questions. (1) Have you been bullied in the last month? (2) What is the name of the bully?

3. We were able to identify the same 3-4 names popping up and worked with them and their parents. (In some cases when working with the family it was easy to see where the bullying/ violent behaviour comes from).

4. We sorted out our discipline system, so there were instant consequences that the students understood, and teachers didn’t have to spend teaching time dealing with misbehaviour.

5. We provided professional development for teachers to improve their behaviour management strategies.

6. We provided professional development so that teachers improved their teaching. A lot of bullying/ violence occurs when there is ‘down time’ in class.

7. We tidied up our ’systems’. e.g. walking in quiet lines around the school, lining up for buses after school, sitting down to eat lunch. basic stuff really, but children appreciate order. Disorderly behaviour in an ordered environment stands out.

8. We invited the same GSE people back 12 months later to observe in the same classes for the same amount of time.

9. Bullying/ violence had reduced by 90%. (4 incidents were noted in that sameobservation time).

My concern for the $62m set aside to address bullying is that it will be squandered on high level and complicated ideas when simple solutions based on what works on the ground are required.

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.

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.

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

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

Kelvin  … Excuse me but that sounds like a stock answer.
This is not about being exclusive it’s about being inclusive.  I cannot see the logic of your argument that if one person holds a point of view that the others will also.  It does not follow logically.  I believe that we all you need to be under the same laws as one nation.
Laws based on one ethnic groups religion, whether European on Maori,  cannot be applied to everybody.

Your response seems unreasonably prejudiced.  I have many Maori friends and we are good mates.
Maybe you need to grow a more universal view of the whole of New Zealand as one nation.

Thanks for your response  -  Denis

Kelvin

On reflection about your response to my email I would like to make a comment -
I wrote to you (as a supporter of the National party) expressing what I believe are legitimate concerns concerning National party leadership decisions.

I would expect from a man of your position: a reasoned response to my concerns answering these – maybe giving a different opinion for me to consider.
If you disagree with my concerns please say so and say why …

I am surprised and concerned that instead of a reasoned response:
1. you made a scathing attack on my opinion and my person.
2. You accuse me of being part of the problem.
3. You give the opinion that I ‘will not see that’ – a real put down.

Kelvin I believe you are appointed to a high office in our country’s leadership — we pay you well — and we expect a more reasonable and helpful response — not a scathing, vindictive personal attack on me.
Think about it man — you can do a lot better than that.

Denis

Denis

Taranaki is an ancestral mountain – to Maori it is extremely tapu. Cooked food is extremely ‘noa’ the opposite of tapu. What they did was desecrate an ancestor of the Taranaki people. At my marae up in the Bay of Islands we rub bread on our hands when we leave our cemetery after funerals to completely remove tapu from ourselves and our clothing. For us it is not a ‘cultural belief’ it is just the way of life.

We take our shoes off before entering our meeting house so that we don’t carry dirt into the body of our ancestor. If those same kids walked into our meeting house with their shoes on they’d be asked to take them off. Are you saying they should be allowed to do this, or DoC officers should be allowed to walk into our marae with shoes on because government agencies shouldn’t have to uphold cultural beliefs?

If something had have happened to that group on the mountain or copycat groups, those Taranaki people would have felt responsible.

What would the reaction be if they had set up their barbecue on the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, cooked some sausages, spilt some sauce, sat around laughing and joking, then picked up some rubbish?

I think people would see that as desecration despite their best intentions. Government agencies such as the police would be expected to act not be criticized for acting.

But most telling is that this christian youth group wouldn’t even dream of doing this because they understand the sacredness and respect all New Zealanders have for the Unknown Soldier, who is very much like an ancestor of us all. It’s not actually a kiwi cultural belief, but just the way things are, just like the way things are with my hapu and the bread at our cemetery, taking our shoes off at the meeting house and Taranaki iwi beliefs about their mountain.

But non-Maori just don’t have that intrinsic understanding or feeling for the Maori world and pour scorn on us for upholding what is precious to us.

People such as yourself accuse us of being separatist. If us trying to uphold our way of life by telling people when they offend us is separatism then so be it.

Why can’t you and others like you simply accept there are two world views and embrace them both and celebrate the diversity.

What annoys me about your original message is the implication the Maori world view is irrelevant.

NZ is like a river. On one bank is the Maori world and on the other bank is the pakeha world. The Treaty of Waitangi is a bridge that connects the two worlds.

The trouble is Maori have crossed the bridge into the pakeha world and taken up the language, culture and laws. Almost no pakeha have crossed over into the Maori world and understand our language, culture and lores.

The ignorance almost entirely lies with pakeha, but Maori are accused of being the problem.

While the Maori world view continues to be ignored we will continue to have conflict.

If you don’t understand the Maori perspective you are part of the problem but none of the solution.

It is your ignorance that has erected ethnic boundaries. It is your ignorance that has you sitting comfortably in your own ethnic and cultural enclave while throwing stones at Maori who are able to stand tall in both worlds.

I challenge you to look long and hard at yourself.

Kelvin

Before I post Denis’ latest reply I want to hear other’s views.

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.

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.

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.