Well Duh? Hone and Metiria colour themselves stupid by ignoring the facts

Parties to the left claim to stand for the poor. National and Act announced a Charter School policy to help that group but the Left have played the “hands off those are our constituents” stupid game.

In parliament these two questions were asked in a moment or two of genius.

METIRIA TUREI to the Minister of Education: Given the Salvation Army’s State of the Nation report shows a widening education gap between students from wealthier and poorer communities, would she have done anything differently, in hindsight, to better support children in lower decile schools?

HONE HARAWIRA to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: Does he agree that a Māori and Pacific unemployment rate that has been nearly three times higher than the Pākehā rate for each of the four years of his Government’s time in office signals the failure of the National Governments employment, education, skills and training policies for Māori and Pacific peoples; if not, why not?

The Swedish data is fantastic and the The New York Times recently declared that Kipp and the Uncommon Schools have actually managed to eliminate the learning gap between poor and higher-income students.

When Kipp founder Mike Feinberg was out here Hone’s best friend John Minto went to the meetings and vocally rubbished him. That is be kind of like is SBW criticised Ali.

Any chance the Greens and others could put dumb politics aside and support a proposal designed to help the poor and Maori. Any chance they might put children ahead of their own desire for power?

Not bloody likely.


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.

  • Patrick

    Minto is the biggest commie loser the world has ever known. He would oppose anything that may improve the lives of his supporters & thereby lessen his support base.

    • BJ

      I used to work with Minto’s wife (is he still married?) about 30 yrs ago. The day of of their wedding I recall them going down to the beach after her working day finished in jeans and bare feet as they were. A sausage cooked over a fire then placed in white bread with lashings of sauce was enjoyed by all their guests. So you can apppreciate the level of ambition he has for the country.

      • Patrick

        He came & gave a speech to our college prior to the ’81 Springbok tour, nobody knew who he was. If only I could wind the clock back knowing what I know now.

        • In Vino Veritas

          He’s still speaking at colleges Patrick. Still changing history to his version. In fact, he often drags along (even though he’s uninvited) Marx Jones, the flour bomb pilot. Minto is, and always has been a poison to this country of ours.

  • In Vino Veritas

    I think you are doing a disservice to SBW. Minto is a vacuous no hoper from way back, with no ability at anything in particular. At least SBW is good at football.

    Harawira might be reminded he assaulted students at the University of Auckland with baseball bats, that’s what his education did for him. The guy is intellectually bereft. And Turei – MacGillycuddy Serious Party says it all.

  • williamabong

    Next we will have Turei demanding the Salvation Army are forced to hand back their guns.

  • Phar Lap

    Turei and Harawira speak with forked tongue.on all things to do with the “poor”.They grasped the huge Parliamentary wage increase without batting an eyelid.They now are on at least $200K A YEAR,yet they pay feigned lip service to the” poor”.Wonder what happens to the huge income the NZ taxpayer gives them, for doing nothing for the nation,other than telling lies.

    • Patrick

      They use it to buy fags, booze, Maccas & KFC for their voters

      • williamabong

        They sure do an ounce goes a long way, especially if it’s from a good cloned plant.

  • unitedtribes

    Education for the poor is denying Labour their votes like contraceptives for the catholics is denying them their flock

  • BJ

    Everyone should watch Parliament TV! It would be good if the general public were encouraged by the media to look in on Parliament proceedings some time. That would make any half intelligent person sit upright and take notice – it may change the mindset of many a left leaning voter.

    I would love to know how to ‘get it out there’, how informative and entertaining the experience of watching the various MP’s conduct is – any suggestions?

  • Dan

    Diane Ravlitch, who worked in the administration of GHW Bush promoting the collection and publication of national standards and went on to write and edit books and articles making the case for charter schools (and even founded organisations which lobbied for them) explains her disillusionment with the results so far:


    Pertinent for the tl;dr types:

    “Meanwhile the states responded to NCLB by dumbing down their standards so
    that they could claim to be making progress. Some states declared that between
    80%-90% of their students were proficient, but on the federal test only a third
    or less were. Because the law demanded progress only in reading and math,
    schools were incentivized to show gains only on those subjects. Hundreds of
    millions of dollars were invested in test-preparation materials. Meanwhile,
    there was no incentive to teach the arts, science, history, literature,
    geography, civics, foreign languages or physical education.

    In short, accountability turned into a nightmare for American schools,
    producing graduates who were drilled regularly on the basic skills but were
    often ignorant about almost everything else. Colleges continued to complain
    about the poor preparation of entering students, who not only had meager
    knowledge of the world but still required remediation in basic skills. This was
    not my vision of good education.

    When charter schools started in the early 1990s, their supporters promised
    that they would unleash a new era of innovation and effectiveness. Now there are
    some 5,000 charter schools, which serve about 3% of the nation’s students, and
    the Obama administration is pushing for many more.

    But the promise has not been fulfilled. Most studies of charter schools
    acknowledge that they vary widely in quality. The only major national evaluation
    of charter schools was carried out by Stanford economist Margaret Raymond and
    funded by pro-charter foundations. Her group found that compared to regular
    public schools, 17% of charters got higher test scores, 46% had gains that were
    no different than their public counterparts, and 37% were significantly

    Charter evaluations frequently note that as compared to neighboring public
    schools, charters enroll smaller proportions of students whose English is
    limited and students with disabilities. The students who are hardest to educate
    are left to regular public schools, which makes comparisons between the two
    sectors unfair. The higher graduation rate posted by charters often reflects the
    fact that they are able to “counsel out” the lowest performing students; many
    charters have very high attrition rates (in some, 50%-60% of those who start
    fall away). Those who survive do well, but this is not a model for public
    education, which must educate all children.”

    Not to be taken as ‘proof they don’t work’, but certainly proof that they can make no difference, or make things worse, if targets aren’t practical, but the funniest thing of all is that critics have long pointed out that the main reason proponents of charter schools are so into them is the prospect of smashing the teahers’ unions. However, as Ravlich shows, many of these non-unionised charter schools have been fucking the dog, and ”
    on the whole, there is very little performance difference between them”, which gives the lie to the argument that non-unionised teachers are going to miraculously perform better now that they aren’t in unions, because, uh, um, yeah.

    So, having argued for national standards and chater schools, won the argument for them, and then watched them go live and play out for quite some time, Ravlitch concludes: “On our present course, we are disrupting communities, dumbing down our schools, giving students false reports of their progress, and creating a private sector that will undermine public education without improving it. Most
    significantly, we are not producing a generation of students who are more
    knowledgable, and better prepared for the responsibilities of citizenship. That
    is why I changed my mind about the current direction of school reform.”

    • Hazards001

      to long

      • StupidDiscus

        Too Communist.

        • Hazards001

          And that

    • StupidDiscus

      schools were incentivized to show gains only [reading and maths]… Meanwhile, there was no incentive to teach the arts, science, history, literature,
      geography, civics, foreign languages or physical education.

      and what the f**k is wrong with that?

      More to the point: creating a private sector that will undermine public education sounds like a great outcome to me!

      So even the leftist arguments against Charter Schools end up showing how great they actually are!

      • Dan

        Well, theauthor isn’t a leftist, she’s one of the people who lobbied for and advocated charter schools on that very basis – basic literacy and numeracy before we worry about the fancy stuff, but the problem with it, as she makes clear, is that they failed even to achieve that. That’s what makes Diane Ravlich’s article so compelling, she is coming from a right-of-centre perspective. As one of the original advocates of these schemes, and she has seen the results after several years in-field, and has the stones to admit that the results have not lived up to what she argued they would be, both in the cases of published national standards and charter schools. But hey, inconvenient facts = commie propaganda, right?

        All this suggests that you may not have read before commenting.