by Catherine Delahunty
Last week during Adult Learners Week many people marched in all our main cities protesting against the night class cuts. The Government and the Minister of Tertiary Education have maintained an icy silence. The Minister attended no functions celebrating Adult Learners Week
Previously the Minister of Tertiary Education Anne Tolley said that the 80% cut to night classes was necessary because we are in a recession and we must prioritise literacy education. Then she cut the funding of many literacy providers, as well as training providers working with young people struggling with literacy issues.
It’s a decidedly odd approach compared to the United Kingdom where the Government has committed $50 million to the informal education sector. A Government White Paper titled “The Learning Revolution” explains why this large investment is so important in a recession.
The UK Government has grasped the link between community education and community economic and social development. They recognise that the response to unemployment and tough times is to invest in learning, training, upskilling and participation .
Rather than cutting $13 million in ACE funding the Green Party would double the investment and expand the outreach of ACE to help the second chance learners, unemployed people, migrant parents and isolated individuals reconnect with education.
The National/Act idea Government idea of a “classless” society is coming true as night schools collapse and $35 million is invested in private schools.
Published in Economy, Work, & Welfare | Society & Culture by Catherine Delahunty on Wed, September 16th, 2009
Tags: ACE, adult education, Catherine Delahunty, Education, night classes
More posts by Catherine Delahunty | more about Catherine Delahunty
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
Any links to official information on where this money is in the budget/spending?
Or is this a myth?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Clearly a mythtake to cut the nightclartheth.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit,
I may be wrong (since I live overseas and am not as up-to-date on NZ news as you), but I believe the 35 million refers to this:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/education/news/article.cfm?c_id=35&objectid=10575181
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Samiuela,
When you read the full article (and not just cherry pick negative details from it for political point scoring) we find that the $35M is part of
and that the teachers union were in actual favour of the initiatives
Interesting that the Green party are keen to political point score without even looking at the whole picture. I guess that says a lot for Catherine as she sees this as “class” distinction.
From another perspective think about this. If all private schools were to close under Catherine’s “classless” system. How much would the tax payer have to fund the infastructure (land – buildings – teaching aids, etc.) plus expenses (teachers pay etc.) to provide for the kids that go to private schools currently?
I think the whole posting is a beatup by the author for pushing an agenda that is “class” motivated. I dont thinks she is at all motivated to improving kids education.
1950′s politics that fails to realise that even under ther most perfect socialist system imagineable, there will be a “ruling” class and a “plebs” class.
There is no such thing as a “classless” society. Only libetarians and anarchists have values that come even close to having a “classless” society.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
There is no such thing as a “classless” society.
True
Only libetarians and anarchists have values that come even close to having a “classless” society.
Debatable.
I do not regard ANY society as managing it, including libertarians and anarchists. They manage only to make the classes a function of things other than “class” membership at birth… they do not remove ability or economic inheritance as factors.
A lot of argument around this. I am pointing up that the economic stratification of the society is the problem Greens care (or should care) about in this context. In other words, to ME, “class” in a society is basically a function of the GINI index. That’s not precise but it is a good working indicator. Higher GINI, more “class” differences.
As for the government action… it seems a bit odd, but in considering it I have to reflect that I actually prefer to see something like the Swedish system (a restricted voucher arrangement) in any case. Good schools have to be available for everyone, and privatization in the manner the government appears to be doing it, doesn’t help that process.
It is hard to claim that money going to “rich people’s schools” in a country that already has a GINI index around 36, is going to help.
Our GINI appears to have been raised rather markedly between the mid 80′s and the mid 90′s. Most of the societies that I regard favorably, have a GINI below 30. The USA is at 40. Mexico is 46. China 47. Sweden 25…
It isn’t a perfect measure, but it gives some insight into the “fairness” offered to people who aren’t “wealthy”. I think that the diversion of money to the “rich folks schools” tends to bring out the class warrior in most of us. Even me, and I already know that the poor folks lost the war
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BJ
Totally agree, just trying to point out that the Greens actually dont support a “classless” society (if they were they would not be in the ruling class parliament). The reason my eyebrow was raised was when a far left Green MP is going on about “class” without truelly believing she really wants a “classless” society.
But maybe I’m wrong, there are degrees of “class” exceptable to her.
So what are the “class” warriors fighting for?
To distribute the wealth evenly requires the services of an “overlord” class. One with the power and the muscle to keep the “pleb” class in check. Something the libertarians and anarchists at least dont subscribe to (not that they have any idea how that would work in a practical situation).
Now if we could choose our “class”, where would we all like to belong to?
Could I suggest that Catherine would like to be in the “overlord” class?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
To distribute the wealth evenly requires the services of an “overlord” class.
Is this really true if you have an effective democracy?
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I think Gerrit is suggesting Benign Dictatorship.
The Dictatorship bit appears all too easy, the Benign bit seems somewhat more problematic.
I’ll stick to democracy in the mean time, thanks.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BJ,
Absolutely, just think of how a “true” and “full” democracy would handle conflict resolution. It cant.
That is why anarchism and libertarianism will never work. It relies on goodwill and compromise (amongs other things).
Unfortunately the genes for those particular traits are not embedded into human beings.
In New Zealand and other “deocratic” countries we have majority rule. Not the same as democracy.
We vote for our “overlord” class. In Venuzeala, Zimbawe , North Korea, etcv. you dont.
But we are not truelly “democratic” and able to achieve a classless society.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Absolutely, just think of how a “true” and “full” democracy would handle conflict resolution. It cant.
Hmmm… I think I don’t quite understand what you are meaning in terms of “true” and “full” in this case.
For me a real democracy is representative of the majority will of the people with respect for the minority’s rights. That would make a real Constitution rather important to me, and it is, particularly here.
Since the representatives elected are not a permanent “class” but can be changed by the people themselves at any time, the people themselves are their own “overlords”. I think that you would be examining this anc saying the representatives are the “overlords” and to an extent you are correct, but that is the only differentiation I can see between democracy and anarchy in any case. I don’t think the difference is that great.
That’s the theory. In practice people tend to stay in politics and get re-elected.. often long past their use-by date, and often because they have money behind them and a need for money to get elected again. The distortions here are destructive of democratic processes.
Which tells us that any real representative democracy is a pretty damned fragile thing… and overall we aren’t doing real well in our support of it.
This ALSO goes back to the GINI, as “if money talks, them as has, gets” seems to be the rule, creating a feedback which amplifies the power of the people with money over time. A lower GINI means that more people who are “comparatively” less well off are still not so impoverished as to lose interest in the antics of the overlord” class which in this country is clearly the people who have money. Much as is true in the USA, only there the degree of the problem is significantly worse.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Just trying to get a picture of what Catherine would envisage a “classless” would look and function like in a democracy.
If, as I suspect she has no clear picture, how can she be taken serious with a claim for a classless society.
Fairer sure, but classless?
Agree we need a constitution and most definitely restrict MPs to 3 term in parliament max (9 years).
To many are career politicians instead of our best representatives.
Love the edit feature on the blog – thanks frog.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit
Agreed, 3 terms in parliament but maybe one last one is in prison? The only problem with this is that the parliamentary rules appear to be arcane enough to take at least 6 months to truly master. Maybe we need a special class for them
We KNOW they’re guilty of something
I have no idea what would be classless to anyone else. I look at the GINI and I reckon it using that tool and my perception of what the state is actually providing me and everyone else for all the tax money we send it.
I think this time it was just supposed to be a “clever play on words” that didn’t work all that well.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BJ, I’ll bite on the prison thing.
The German rationale for compulsory military service is that citizens are going to vote for a government which is going to decide whether to use an army, so the citizens had better know what armies are like, and what they can and cannot do.
That reasoning extends almost perfectly to politicians and imprisonment.
I already knew I wasn’t qualified to be a politician; shall I add this as another reason?
Regards,
James.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)