I've been a little hesitant to take a position on
the implementation of charter schools - the flagship policy of the National-Act
coalition and was probably only adverse to the idea based on my own political
leanings and the fact that I didn’t really understand what they meant for the
education system.
On the one hand, my understanding is that they
give parents and in particular minority groups more choice for educating their
children, and in that respect are conducive to multicultural policy in NZ. And
on the other hand, they undermine the public school system on the basis that
the government are implicitly accepting that public schools do not cater to the
educational needs of all children in NZ. In providing more choice to parents in
respect of education, I am in favour.
The worry about charter schools; however, is taxpayer
funding. In effect, charter schools are private schools partially funded by
taxpayers with (arguably) no accountability to the taxpayer. In this respect, I
am opposed.
My view is then, that public schools should be
funded to cater to the needs of minority groups as well as provide all parents
with more choices for educating their children. It seems nonsense for the
government to say in this economic climate we cannot afford to improve the public
system school to this extent but we can fund charter schools.
A side comment about the charter school issue though
is the way in which a minority party were able to force a policy into
implementation. From the coalition agreement it is clear that in order to
obtain the support needed from ACT, National preapproved a policy that required
legislative changes:
“Hon John Banks will be appointed...with delegated authority to lead the work on charter schools...”
While this tactic is probably not new to
politics, it does not bode well for democracy. Remembering ACT only won their
electorate seat in Epsom (which in itself took advantage of the coat tailing
made possible through a poorly constructed MMP system) and received 1.1%
vote overall yet were promised an immense power in being able to determine how
taxpayer money will be used in the context of the ACT charter school
initiative.
Overall, my point is that the idea of providing
more choice for parents in respect of their children’s education is a positive
but in order to do this private bodies should not be able to profit off
taxpayer funded institutions.
Just as I was writing this, I was directed to the following link below for further consideration. Very interesting and makes alot of sense (Thanks Holly!).
