Compare and contrast Lisa Owen’s treatment of two individuals

I will declare my bias up front. Lisa Owen’s treatment of my husband when the Rawshark hacking story hit was appalling. He was the victim of a criminal act, a criminal hack and she constantly interrupted him and spoke to him as if he was a criminal rather than a victim. He was speaking from Israel and even though she knew it took a few seconds for her question to reach him she consistently would not give him time to reply and consistently cut him off. I don’t know how Cam remained calm under the circumstances but like David Seymour in this latest interview he did. Only a transcript of the interview is now showing on The Nation website. The video link has been removed.

Her latest investigation has her interviewing Te Whanau O Waipareira Trust chief executive John Tamihere and Education Under-Secretary David Seymour.  If you compare and contrast the two interviews it is incredibly obvious who she has cast as the victim and who she has cast as the criminal.  The way she speaks to Mr Seymour is disgusting. She lacks respect and keeps trying to frame the story the way she wants it to be, not the way it actually is. David even refers to her ” relentless negativity ” while being interviewed by her.

After hearing David Seymour’s side of the story it is very clear that John Tamihere caused the problem. He was  in possession of all the facts when he made the decision to go ahead.  It was only late in the process that he decided to make demands outside the contract. Lisa Owen though was determined to try and turn this into David Seymour’s problem.  The only legitimate complaint that I could see from Tamihere was that the current applicants have been offered  significantly less funding than previous applicants. However they all knew the funding that was on offer before they applied.

Ironically the reason why they are offered so much less now is because the teacher unions and media complained that charter schools were being given too much money. They were actually getting a lot less than State School start ups, but when has the media and teacher unions ever let the truth get in the way of a good story? What really annoyed me about Tamihere though, was his complaint that his school in the startup phase would have to take students who were difficult.  The charter schools I visited had all taken difficult students but they didn’t let that stop them succeeding.

The whole purpose of charter schools is to help those difficult students who are struggling. Why did Tamihere think that his proposed school was going to get an easy ride?   He made a big deal about his proposed school being in West Auckland but there is already a successful charter school in West Auckland dealing with those exact same types of students. What was overwhelmingly clear from Mr Tamihere was that he thinks the rules shouldn’t apply to him and his proposed school.

To view the interviews click here.

Do you want:

  • ad-free access?
  • access to our very popular daily crossword?
  • access to Incite Politics magazine articles?

Silver subscriptions and above go in the draw to win a $500 prize to be drawn at the end of March.

Not yet one of our awesome subscribers? Click Here and join us.

If you agree with me that’s nice but what I really want to achieve is to make you question the status quo. Look between the lines, do your own research. Do not be a passive observer in this game we call life.