Without political consensus across the parliament, are we at risk of playing ‘ping pong’ with education? Stewart Sowman-Lund explains for The Bulletin.

To receive The Bulletin in full each weekday, sign up here.

Charter schools are on the way (again)

The return of charter schools is just around the corner, with associate education minister David Seymour confirming yesterday that five new schools will open in the new year (on top of the one already announced). As The Press reported, it includes a second for Canterbury – Christchurch North College, to cater for children disengaged from the mainstream education system – while three will open in Auckland. It includes a French school, Ecole Francaise Internationale, and the Busy school, part of an Australian chain.

Seymour has been a long time proponent for charter schools, having shepherded them into existence a first time as part of the John Key government. They were ultimately scrapped by Labour, with the 12 existing charter schools transitioned into state integrated schools. Seymour led a protest against the closures through Auckland Central at the time. But it was only a matter of time before they returned and ultimately it was a key tenet of Act’s election campaign and inked into the coalition agreement with National.

Back up a bit, what’s all this?

If you’ve heard the words “charter school” but don’t really know what means, don’t worry. The Spinoff’s Shanti Mathias prepared this helpful explainer earlier in the year. In short, charter schools, like standard state schools, are funded by the government and free for New Zealand citizens and permanent residents to attend. However, explained Mathias, while state schools must follow a standard New Zealand curriculum, employ qualified teachers, be governed by a school board and be held accountable to the Crown with their role determined by legislation, charter schools have more flexibility. That includes total discretion with how to use provided funding and the ability to set their own curriculum (so long as they still achieve set learning objectives). Yes, that means they’re exempt from the government’s own phone in schools ban.

There are valid arguments on both sides of the debate. Advocates endorse the less fixed options that come from being a charter school, while those opposed say it would be better to raise funding across the board – more on that below.

Politics at play

The road to charter schools return has been paved with some potholes. Labour has already promised to ditch the scheme yet again should it be elected in 2026, potentially meaning these new schools could last just a couple of years before being shuttered. “Labour has got rid of these before, and we will get rid of them again, because they are bad for young people and bad for their learning,” former education minister Jan Tinetti told Q+A. “We will be looking at legal advice around that, but we will get rid of charter schools.” In much the same way both sides of the aisle criticise one another for undoing each other’s infrastructure projects, you’d have to wonder whether re-undoing an education programme is the most worthwhile political move.

In comments to Newsroom back in 2017, at the same time the last Labour government was looking to ditch charter schools, advocate Alwyn Poole criticised those in power for playing “political ping pong” when it came to education. “Someone stands up in parliament and says ‘we will shut them’ – but there are now 420 children that are in our schools. If you talked about shutting down 420 children in state schools, you’d have people on the street with pickets”.

This time around, Poole has had his four applications for new charter schools rejected, reported Stuff’s Steve Kilgallon. He has argued the process for selection was unfair and is considering launching a judicial review.

Privatisation by stealth?

In an interesting piece for The Conversation, a pair of university education professors considered whether the current coalition government was rapidly moving to allow private business interests in public education. That included, they said, the move to reintroduce charter schools. “International experiences with charter schools… demonstrate how they survive or fail at the whims of private funders who can withdraw at any time,” the experts said. They also argued that updates to the New Zealand curriculum, including structure approaches to literacy and maths, will mean schools having to dip into their own budgets to access private resources or train up staff. “Instead, New Zealand needs to be investing in public education for everyone, leaving private education and resources to those who want to pay for it themselves,” the professors argued.

Earlier this year, teachers unions criticised the government for a lack of investment in staff while $153m was being funnelled into charter schools. That money could pay a further 700 full time teacher aides to make “a huge difference in the classroom for ākonga and their teachers,” said Liam Rutherford, a teacher and executive member of NZEI Te Riu Roa. The Post Primary Teachers’ Association has cheekily launched its own online campaign with the domain name “charterschools.co.nz” arguing against the government’s reintroduction of charter schools and also claiming it is designed to “privatise the public education system”.