Kyota.
I'm Chelsea Daniels and this is the Front Page, a daily podcast presented by The New Zealand Herald. With a price tag of one hundred and fifty three million dollars. The Coalition government's paving the way for charter schools to make it comeback.
In twenty twenty five.
The government will fund fifteen new charter schools and the conversion of up to thirty five state schools. The application process is officially open, despite ongoing criticism from the opposition and teaching unions about the return of the controversial system. Today on the Front Page, Associate Minister of Education.
And Character School Champion David Seymour.
Is with us to discuss the pros and cons of the system. First off, David, can you tell me what difference She's a charter school to any other school.
Charter school can be started by a community group. It could be an EWE, It could be a business. It could be a charity or a group of educators who have got frustrated with the public system and have an idea to engage students better. Alternatively, it can be an existing state or state integrated school that wants to convert to charter school status. So once you get past the genesis of them, there is basically one big difference between a charter in a state school and a state school.
You have quite extensive stipulation around what money is received and how it is spent. For example, there's a budget for buildings, there's a budget for staff. The staff are actually paid by the government according to government contracts. There are different funds for different activities like learning support and so on. With a charter school they get the same amount of money that would go to a state school in total, but in cash, so that's the first thing.
They get flexibility of funding. The second thing is that a state school doesn't actually face any hard requirements for student attendance and student achievements, so those things are certainly encouraged, but ultimately, if students don't show up, or students perform poorly academically at a school, then there's no ultimate consequence for that. With a charter school, they sign a contract that says students must attend and students must make progress
towards achievement, and that's important. It's the progress that matters because obviously some students will start at different levels, but they must make measurable progress towards achievement. Otherwise they can lose their funding and be shut down or have their management taken over by someone who has better ideas for how to achieve for the students.
Right, So, that big benefit there from charter schools I'm seeing is responsibility, the ability for schools to be.
Held accountable for poor performance.
So at the moment, if a state school, say, is having awful performance, no one's passing in CAA levels and attendance is poor, are there any consequences?
Well, theoretically a number of things can happen. One is that the board can be held accountable by the parents. But what tends to happen is if you have a community that is very successful has a lot of highly educated parents, that they will do that quite well. If you have a community that has some socioeconomic challenges, often they find they don't actually have the government's capacity and catability to hold their board accountable or for the board
to hold their principal and staff accountable. And so labor recognize this when they were in power, they propose effective setting up regional ministry hubs that would fill a lot more of governance of each school. They didn't go through with those reforms for a variety of reasons. That so happened back in two thousand and eighteen. But this is a long term problem with the state sector in New Zealand that we are seeking to solve by changing up
the way that the schools a government and manage. And of course the other thing that can happen is that with an adverse Education Review Office report, the government can replace board of trustees with a commission manager or statutory manager. That this happens from time to time and some schools
go in and out of statutory management. However, ultimately, if you don't change the flexibility they have to deliver results and actually enable them to do things differently, then it's really just a case of the beatings will continue until morale improve, and that's never been a successful form. So you know, in our view, your boy have hard accountability, but also give their educators flexibility to get involved in a different way of engaging students.
Not just creating new ones, but converting some state schools as well. Since Stevens Marty Boys Boarding School also known as Tippany will become a charter school, they.
Will look quite different that they'll start doing and finish late.
But the productivity that I think the prevalents over that time is really crucial.
Well, there's already a wide range of offerings for parents, though, write everything from KUTA and public schools to private schools, public integrated special character correspondence.
Why do parents need another option?
Well, I acknowledge that there are a wide variety of schools in New Zealand. But if you start to think about the choices that parents have if wealthy versus a disadvances, it's certainly true that parents with money can move to a more expensive school zone. Until a lot of real estate advertising is around that parents with money can pay sometimes twenty five thirty thousand dollars a year per child after tax to send their children to an independent or
private school. But if you're a parent who doesn't have those kinds of capabilities, then you may find that actually you don't have the kind of choices others do. So I think it's critical that we actually develop choices that are available regardless of how much money you have. And in many ways I'm an old fashioned lefty, but I believe that we pay taxes for education so every child has the opportunity to be developed to their full academic potential.
I don't think we're doing that right now. And the actual left wing parties and the form of labor and grants that they are actually more wedded to the provide of the education, particularly not the teachers but their unions, then they are to getting the outcome for the students. You'll notice I didn't mention Tair party Maldi, who have told me they're actually very much in favor of charter schools.
So with the charter school model, could there be any room, say for religious schools, ones catering to neurodiversity perhaps, or even schools I've seen in the US there's ones for LGBTQ plus youth.
Is that a possibility down the track?
I think probably all of those are possibilities. I mean, for one thing, we already had a large number of several hundred religious schools in the form of Catholic and other denominational state integrated schools, and they from today are eligible to apply and convert, and they could keep their
religious character. If it was a new startup charter school, and theory there could be one with a faith based character that they're going to need to be ready to include and accept any students who apply, so they still have to do that in a way that it doesn't rule without or put off people for a time. Certainly, we've had expressions of interest already from potential school operators who would like to cater for students who are neurodiverse.
That that's a major issue for parents and educases made across the board. I'm not familiar with the old g B t Q plus school in the United States, but we would certainly take seriously an application because you know, there's a lot of challenges that students face around the development of the sexuality, and it may be that there are educators who had a good idea for doing that.
I also just make the point that this should be seen as a massive opportunity for educators because at the moment, if I hear one complaint from teachers and principles, it is they are sick and tired of the fans and the meddling and the education system putting all sorts of demands.
Someone put it to me today, I get seven emails a day I have to answer from the Ministry of Education so they can do their job, not for the benefit of the students in my school and That was someone I met who was very interested in becoming a
charter school. Because you sign that contract, it's ten year contract, you get your results, you get your money, and you're actually free, with professional autonomy to educate in ways that are successful and actually behave the way that lawyers or accountants or engineers or architects get to behave with professional autonomy rather than a highly politicized system.
When charter schools were scrapped in twenty seventeen, are called an expensive, failed experiment. Now the Greens are calling the resurgence of them your kind of vanity project.
How do you respond to that?
Well, I start with the second. But you know, I'm a member of Parliament from EPSOM and the EPSOM Electric. We don't just have some of their schools in museum. We're not their schools in the world. So I don't need to spend or why political capital on running a type of school that will mainly benefit students from disadvantaged background. I could just be a member of Parliament from a very very advantage part of the country with great schools
and never think about this. So it's a strange vanity project when actually I'm responding to a deep needs in New Zealand to get better education so that each student can flourish in their own way, something I believe in deeply and I think it's for the good of the whole country. The second thing is I do actually accept some of the criticisms around the way that charter schools were funded in the first round from twenty twelve to twenty eighteen. I think in some cases they actually were
given more money than they should. However, I can absolutely say that we have reduced the amount of funding that is available to the exact same amount pursudent that a state school would receive, something that I have to say I actually worked hard towards when I took over as the Undersecretary responsible for charter schools back in twenty fourteen. Although I acknowledge the funding formulas they are initially set up in twenty twelve and thirteen, we're not quite right. However,
I think you only got to ask yourself. Why are the likes of the Green Party sayings? Why are they opposed to giving professional autonomy to teachers, Why are they opposed to create a new options, Why are they're posts to local governments. Why are they versus something that to party MARII is actually something because they know what a state centralized education system is done to Mary and other
minorities for that matter. And the answer is it's got everything to do with lobbying from not the teachers, but the unions, because those unions take one percent of a teacher's salary to negotiate collective employee agreements. They know that charter skills are exempt from collective employment agreements. The individual contracts, just like any other employer in the museum economy, means you can get rid of bad teachers. It means you can pay more to good teachers. And that for the
unions is an existential threat. And it's shameful that labor of the Greens would rather line up besides middle class people with comfortable jobs and union officers rather than the education profession in general and the disadvanced students of this country.
In terms of why perhaps unions are opposed to these schools, are you saying that they're worried they won't be getting their cut.
The charter schools are an existential threat to the union because charter schools are not required to use the contracts that gans negotiate with teachers. Charter schools if they proceed, will mean that the account of fees paid to union offices and well is dramatically reduced. And that is the beginning, middle, and end of their opposition.
Chris Abercrombie is the president of the PPTA. Why are you not loving this?
Well, it's just the privatization of a public good, you know, taking public money and putting into private profit. And they don't benefit anyone apart from those people who again in the profit.
Doesn't it benefit some of the kids?
Well, I think the moons benefit to our students would be strengthening the state system. They're not cycling money out of it, so I think there would be the biggest benefit to the vast majority of students in this country.
How do we justify paying one hundred and fifty three million dollars on bringing back charter schools when the public sector is I guess looking under every cushion and backgroom cupboard for savings at the.
Moment, because we're funding education for students and this is part of the public sector. The idea that somehow students choose to go to a charter school are somehow unworthy of having their education paid for them, I think as a criticism from some in the Union movement and some from the left that really betrays their real motivations. They don't care enough for children to think that that money
is actually being spent on behalf of children. They only care about the system, and so they construct this falsehood that somehow money spent at charter schools, it's not spent on the children in them.
And in terms of spending money on kids, I've seen a couple of comments of from critics saying that it's a slap in the face of kids, for example, with complex learning needs finding it quite difficult to access learning support at the moment.
What would you say to.
That, Well, it's certainly true we have a system that is neglecting the needs of many students. The answer to that is to accept what we're doing isn't working for them and create new options for educators to run schools differently in their way, with accountability throughout. The alternative is to have endless cry that if only more money was
put into a broken system it would work again. Well, the truth is that if you look around the world, their education systems has a vast amounts of money and got terrible results, and education systems I spent far less
money and got good results. You know, the idea that's putting more money into the same way of doing things that isn't working particularly advanced students, is the answer is not only disproven by the evidence around the world, but also completely implausible given the government's characters the situation.
So, in terms of making decisions around these charter schools, I know it's independent rights and they go through a couple of stages and decisions will be made by the end of the year. Would you like to see a real dove list of those schools that are then decided to go on to be charter schools.
I think we will see a very diverse list, because we have stipulated in government policy that we want to see a range of schools with different EQI or Equity Index scores. So you will see schools I hope that are very highly advantage that want to be part of this, schools that are not if I'm particularly advantage communities. You'll see schools that have a religious character or state integrated schools.
You'll see city, and you'll see country, and certainly today I've seen expressions of interest from every type of school and when I've sat down with educators who are a bit skeptical and said, look, it's on a ten year contract. You get your results of your students showing up and achieving, which is what you intrinsically want to do anyway as an educator, and you'll get your money and you won't have to be harassed or harangued by different fads driven
onto you by you know, Willinson. You don't have to play endless bureaucracy trying to get the Ministry of Education to fix your buildings. You just get on with being educated. But is this real? It's absolutely real. You can apply as of midday Thursday this week.
And lastly, Minister, it's been a few months since we last spoke and the coalition government has passed the six month mark.
How are things going? Are you working well together?
Yeah?
Look, I think from the point of view of our opponents have been scarily united and effective. I think we've done a tremendous job of tackling first of all, the various hospital passes of inflation, government waste and just really some absurd spending and projects. So you know, we've certainly done the firefighting and you're now starting to see things like resource management, you know, transport policy getting rid of its speed limits. You know, we're forming crazy fire laws.
There's a whole lot of things where we're actually we've gone through the sort of slash and burn all the craziness and actually start building some sensible policies of our own and the clearing and I think those will help lead an economic recovery that will deal to the real pressure that New Zealanders are experiencing in the hangover and negative momentum of Labour's economic management.
So you're getting along, well, then no sleepless nights.
No.
Look, I think we've got three people or three partners and government three parties sorry, who are completely united by the hostile circumstances that are facing New Zealanders and a will to put things right and fix them. And I think if you look at the announcements coming out day by day, I think we can say we're doing it.
Or is it because that Winston Peter's in the PM is so often out of the country.
Well you know they say that as of the country. They make me the aesting Prime Minister and it's one ex part I don't mind so much.
Thanks for joining us, Minister, that's it for this episode of the Front Page. You can read more about today's stories and extensive news coverage at enziherld dot co dot nz. The Front Page is produced by Ethan Sills and sound engineer Patty Fox.
I'm Chelsea Daniels.
Subscribe to the Front Page on iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts, and tune in on Monday for another look behind the headlines.