Asking the minister to explain

Email
Print

Asking the minister to explain

3News NZ

The more we look at the school closures in Christchurch the less the justifications seem to make sense.

Last night we revealed significant errors in the Ministry of Education's own work on these schools.

We revealed schools with increasing roles were being closed, and we revealed the ministry's assessment that every building, in every school, of the seven clusters we looked at - hundreds of buildings in total - were all damaged. All of them.

But many of the buildings we've seen aren't damaged at all.

What's going on here?

Dan Parker asked the minister to explain.

Watch the video.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

13/10/2012 10:24:37 p.m.

teacher wrote:

Thank you Campbell Live for pursuing transparency! We have asked continually for the evidence surrounding the closure of our school and the actual reason for closure. We have not had earthquake damage, have a consistent roll, received an excellent ERO review and opened our doors to many students after the earthquake. Evidence and a reason for closure are important, especially when the little information we have been given via an information pack seems incorrect and unrelated to our particular situation. It may very well be that "closure" is a reasonable "firm" proposition however it is a shame we have to use the Official information act to get an answer from the ministry. Every reply we receive to questions around our closure, minutes for meetings are answered with bland misdirection from the ministry. What has happened to transparency. We as teachers and principals have to be openly transparent. How can we consult on a proposal if we do not understand the reasoning behind it? Please keep pursuing this issue on our behalf. This is an ideological governmental push to change NZ education as we know it. Change in itself I am not adverse to as long as it creates a better education for all learners. When will someone address the social issues behind our low achieving students - if we tackled some of these issues we might enable all learners to enter school with all their basic essential needs met, and a future to be proud of.

13/10/2012 1:10:01 p.m.

Just Me wrote:

The pending Canterbury region school closures is a revamped, sooped up way of pushing through the Teacher-pupil ratio that National 'discarded' recently. Just this way,the Canterbury school closures, is an excellent way to get the teacher-ratio into action with little or no publicity. Sneak the policy in through the back-door is their,National's, logic. Once Canterbury has been dealt the death blow there will be other closures throughout NZ region by region. It will be of interest as to how many private schools in the Canterbury region will be closed if any. Our politicians and especially this government needs/wants a poorly educated society as it's easier for them(National)to manipulate and push about.The mainly apathetic voters(who don't vote at election time)are probably those in the lower socio-economic regions which will experience school closures. A teacher with a larger class,due to the school closures,will only focus extra education to those who want to learn.There are many who view school as a temporary interruption to being on a benefit or something. They are probably Tomorrow's central government politicians.They are the free-loaders and donation-seekers.

5/10/2012 4:26:19 a.m.

Kelvin wrote:

A good thought Alison. Most of these areas would be 'working class' (hate that term but you know what I mean!) Greenpark is rural but a developing as lifestyle block area. Ouruhia would probably be a more financially able area. Burnside, New Brighton, Linwood and Aranui would all be 'working class'. Probably does affect mostly Labour voting areas - maybe.

4/10/2012 6:22:35 p.m.

the DR wrote:

what a joke if they cant get the number of class right or even whole buildings how can they be taken seriously at all yes mr key and co do have a hidden agenda don't let them do it

4/10/2012 3:40:08 p.m.

marty wrote:

Alison, in response to your question, here is another question... why have they only challenged the status of mid to lower decile schools? None of the Intermediate schools in Merivale and Ilam or from whom Cashmere people go to have been challenged, and so it is when you look at most of the other schools doomed They are not messing with the higher decile areas on the whole? Scared of the challenge they would get?

4/10/2012 9:28:03 a.m.

Kelvin wrote:

A couple of points. remember that the government needs to create some 'gaps' in schooling provision in Chch, into which they can provide a 'solution' of Charter schools. Wouldn't it be most convenient of some sites became available - with buildings that could be repaired or even brand new (as in the case of Manning Intermediate) available? Another thought is that the Ministry is in such a state of disarray that they are simply unable to complete the tasks before them - or maybe they have deliberately generated mistakes to embarrass the government!! Perhaps education still does have some friends in the Ministry - who knows!!

4/10/2012 7:56:40 a.m.

Ruz wrote:

Parata seems paralysed when confronted by hard questions from the media. It is clear that like Tolley was before her she is out of her depth with the Education portfolio.

4/10/2012 7:12:47 a.m.

alison wrote:

Can anybody tell me if there is any truth to the areas that this has affected as I am not from ch ch. Are these indeed all non national voting areas as someone said or richer suburbs that wont accept charter schools? Just curious

3/10/2012 10:45:48 p.m.

Darryl wrote:

How much did they pay their "independent experts" to assess the damage and prepare the report? And if they paid them a lot (and I'd be very surprised if they didn't) why do schools now have tpo spend time and money correcting the report? Also, will the Ministry be seeking a refund for the poor work done?

3/10/2012 10:06:33 p.m.

marty wrote:

Couple of thoughts/questions 1 Why did they announce things days before many principals were at conference in Melbourne, thus missing meetings? 2 By 'out of the blue', assessing buildings as "watertight issues", that were not issues before and not related to EQ, they have increased their so called justification for closure? How many schools all of a sudden were told of water tight issues that never existed before, and with what justification? 3 By forcing RESTORE and other schools into clusters... is not the end result, Cluster Boards, one Cluster CEO, and goodbye to unique school environments and cultures as well as massive job losses? I am already part of a cluster that works effectively but the EQ has highlighted just how different our 5 communities are and this is to do with the people in the areas, and will not change 4 Chch has given them an excuse to try these ideas... change must happen, no one disputes that, but what if Epsom Girls was asked to merge with St Cuths? and Tawa College with Porirua College? ... Otago Boys with ??? Auckland Grammar with ???? Ask the country what they think? They seem to think teachers and the community cannot see thru their flawed and terribly managed process and plan?