Not from education sector?

As we have seen there has been attacks in the media on Catherine Isaac and her supposed lack of qualifications in the Education sector. This somehow is supposed to discount her from participating in or chairing the committee responsible for overseeing the implementation of Charter Schools.

This is really the elitism of tenured education staff and their fervant belief that only the teacher unions are allowed a say about eduction. It is typical socialist we-know-best attitudes.

Nanaia Mahuta jumped right in:

Labour’s education spokeswoman Nanaia Mahuta said Ms Isaac’s appointment was political opportunism from the Act Party.

“I see it as no surprise. She has strong linked to the Act Party and they’re putting in one of their mates to push along their ideology.

But if you look at her lifetime at the public trough you can see she is actually far less qualified to talk on anything, let alone education, yet for some reason the union dominated Labour party has seen fit to appoint her as Education spokesperson. I think that everytime Ms Mahuta opens her gob to talk about Education she is told to sit back down until she has done her time in the education sector.

Then there is Catherine Delahunty:

Green education spokeswoman Catherine Delahunty today described Isaac’s pending appointment as ”disturbing”.

”The trial now looks like a joke.

”It shows this is nothing to do with education, it’s to do with the Government’s agenda to turn the education system into a business opportunity.”

Isaac’s three terms as a school trustee did not qualify her for the role, said Delahunty, who has also been a school trustee.

”This is a major political platform for education. It is a change in direction. It is not something for amateurs.”

Catherine Delahunty should take her own advice and STFU about education as well. She isn’t even remotely qualified to even issue press releases on the subject. I find it highly ironic that her favourite recipe is for a fruitcake.

It was nice of the opposition to focus on qualifications for speaking about education. Now they can just shut up.


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Michael

    She is more qualified for this than Mike Williams was qualified to be member on just bout every government board going. And far more qualified than Ken Douglas was for running a post office.

    I can’t say Catherine is my favourite person, but she is genuine about education and using it to lift people out of poverty with it.

  • Kthxbai

    “University life would not keep Catherine’s attention and she left Victoria half way through her BA.”

    Says it all.  Given her unimpressive employment record since university, it suggests she’s either not very bright or has no self discipline. 

    • Dr Wang

      Or both.

    • Tony

      but she can grow a better beard than I can unfortunately…….. :-(

  • Hakimofphut

    Mahuta is fine as Education spokeswoman, its never been a requirement to ‘know’ education’. As is shown by Tolley previously and Banks  now – even more so.
    What Issacs  has been appointed to is an advisory board,  some knowledge is required. 
    Would you appoint a public relations expert to advise on building bylaws after the Canterbury earthquakes?

    • In Vino Veritas

      Oh please! What a load of drivel. Being in parliament making decisions on the course of the country and its population can’t be compared to being on an advisory board? What planet are you from? 

    • Kosh103

      Tolley was a failure and a fool.

  • johnopkb

    Politicians on the left complaining of an idealogical approach to education has me laughing my poor aching guts out

  • As I understand it, Catherine Isaac has been appointed to a role which will oversee the trial of Charter Schools. Of course they had to appoint someone who:

    a) Believes in the policy
    b) Understands the concept

    Both of which rule out anyone Labour would have selected, as evidenced by their current crop of list MPs.

  • Blokeintakapuna

    Labour staffers and social media trolls are out in force again I see. Talk about pot calling the kettle black from Labour. It was their failed ideologies that set children up for big FAILURES when all they “know” about the real world is:
    –         It’s ok if you don’t win or lose – as long as you participated, we are all equal with no winners or losers
    This kind of utter rubbish might be true in the Labour Party or the Teachers Union where all that is needed is to put in an appearance – regardless of value added. However; once the child leaves school, reality hits and the insulated, molly-coddled child then has to learn the hard way that if you don’t win – then you always lose. That’s life – it’s not fair, but no one ever said it would be!
    I bet Guy Fawkes had a Labour Party parliament to inspire him!

    • Hakimofphut

      NZ children  do very well by International standards. The numbers ( 20%) that get floated around are mostly false

      • Greg M

        Bollocks. I have just advertised for a school leaver office person to help out with letter writing, and filing of tenancy agreements etc, so I wont have to work 16 hour days any more.
        What a shower of shit. I narrowed it down to 20, half of these have spelling and grammar worse than  Phil U. I am offering $ 15 per hour to attract better candidates, to no avail.
        Oh well, I’m used to working 7am to 2 am now, may as well carry on myself.

      • You’re not based in Wellington, are you, Greg M? Its not in Wellington, by any chance? I am a school leaver – and would love such a job! I don’t even want $15/hr. 

      • Dion

        Why do I see so many on the left saying that without any facts to back it up?

      • Greg M

        Auckland  sorry to say Joel. You just won a whole heap of points for showing some initiative.Good on you! Flick me an email if you’re up this way, I may be able to help. Cheers Greg.

      • PauliePaul

        Hakim, even if the 20% is slightly inflated we are talking about very basic levels of literacy and numeracy that these kids are failing (NCEA level 2). Th international results that you speak of actually show very clearly that we have a woeful ‘tail’ of failure … No two ways about it.

      • Kosh103

        Correct. The made up 20% includes learning and behaviour problem children, not just children who are actually failing. It is a right wing lie and too many fools have swallowed it.

  • Kosh103

    Pauliepaul to say the 20% is slightly inflated is like saying the Pope is slightly Catholic.

    • Greg M

      Kosh, I am interested to know what is the percentages of kids failing and the percentages caused by behavior problems?
      Overall I think it probably is around 20%, all added together.
      I believe that problems at home are not only causing these kids to fail, it is also dragging down the rest of the school, that’s a big issue that nobody really discusses.

      I don’t want a loser kid in my kid’s class dragging her down, but as a parent, I cant ask the school “how many loser kids are in ******’s class”

      Your thoughts please.

      • Kosh103

        The problems are mainly in the home. But good luck getting the right to admit that. That would mean they could no longer attack teachers who they hate so very much.

        And yes these problems come to school and then the teacher has to deal with them at the expense of other students. It is a very serious problem. I am lothe to say put all the bad eggs in one place, as they are kids and they are a product of their home environment and not blame – until they reach an age where they can truely understand the power of choice. And if the right think that charter schools are going to “cure” these kids and turn them into learners, they have another thing coming.

        Also I dont really like the term “loser kid”. Kids are not losers, they are what their parents make them, and they need all the help they can to break free of their parents in some cases. No teacher worth anything will turn their back on a child. However I am willing to be the leaders of these charter schools would happily do that.

      • Greg M

        You have raised a point that I have mentioned here before,The problem kids turn up at school and the teacher has to deal with it. I want our teachers teaching, not being social workers which they shouldn’t have to do, aren’t trained for, and aren’t we already paying another government department to do that ?
        My opinion, not enough emphasis is being placed on sorting kids out before they turn up for school each day. Once that has been sorted, then the teachers and their unions are fair game.
        Point noted about my “loser kids” comment.

      • The right wing knows the problems are in the home. I’m not sure why you think we don’t want to admit it. The problems are caused by bad parenting, which is not something the government can easily cure. 

        The right wing certainly does not hate teachers. We don’t even hate the teachers’ unions. We think they act irrationally and make unreasonable demands on pay whilst attempting to block new ideas, but that’s beside the point. 

        It bothers me that there are good, hard-working, thrifty, upstanding people struggling to concieve a baby, while there are negligent, lazy, parents bringing up litters of problem children who burden the state in childhood and are sure to later in adulthood. I know adopting a child is not the same as raising your own flesh and blood, but surely there is something we can do here? 

      • Greg M

        Joel, could you please email me a copy of your CV, not the fucking big flash one , just the basics, I will pass it around my contacts here, who will have contacts in wellington. No promises, but it could be worth a try.
        You have initiative, and I respect that.send it here:
        navy.greg @
         this link will disappear at 2.30 am.