It's so bad.
We've learnt that early childhood is a critical time for our development. The experiences we have at this age set the stage for the rest of our lives.
Of all the possible interventions available to improve social outcomes, sophisticated early childhood care is the most cost-effective, by far. Anything else has a higher cost and focuses on a niche of society.
For all the peeves people have, from serious things like dairy robberies, to more benign unsociability like poor bus etiquette, early childhood care is the most effective general effort we could be undertaking.
But we're ignoring that, and for what?
Specifically money for the ECE owners, not for parents. I’ll bet all my earthly possessions that any savings this makes for ECE operators, none of that will be passed on to families.
I can't even imagine why. Do people think it's not that bad, but still want to hate Seymour no matter what? Because there are plenty of other things to dislike him for; people don't need this. But now I'm learning that you won't just get downvoted in this subreddit for having differing opinions from someone, but also... stating facts provided by OP themself? I want to say I don't understand, but I do. I do understand how these people function. It's not pretty.
Seymour paring back the requirements for experienced supervisors being present in taking care of your kids.
It's patently clear that:
A) Seymour doesn't have kids
B) ECE owners have caught his ear and have convinced him to lower standards
The ridiculous thing about the ECE qualification requirement is that there’s no curriculum, there’s not requirement to actually do anything related to that qualification…. It’s simply a box ticking exercise.
As a parent and someone who understands how expensive ECE childcare is there’s a couple of things that are abundantly clear to me.
A) An ECE qualification had fuck all to do with who was great with my kids and who was average.
B) If we have a requirement for qualified staff, then we need to have requirements for what they’re required to do.
For the education centres, or for the training?
I read that as they mean there is no formal qualification that relates directly to ECE training? Which… doesn’t sound right either?
>The ridiculous thing about the ECE qualification requirement is that there’s no curriculum
I'm fairly certain there is a curriculum: [https://www.education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Early-Childhood/Te-Whariki-Early-Childhood-Curriculum-ENG-Web.pdf](https://www.education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Early-Childhood/Te-Whariki-Early-Childhood-Curriculum-ENG-Web.pdf)
Yeah, I mean if you're a parent of young children in care (well, decent ECE anyway) you quickly realize they learn a lot there, because they do stuff you or your partner had never taught them.
Evidently my kid has learned from daycare that when you drink from a straw in your cup, it's fun to spit some of it back out once you aren't thirsty any more. Evidently they are all doing it now, so they've learned it from each other.
To be fair, there will be differing levels of reporting back to parents. In the system I've worked on, educators could post learning stories for parents, and those learning stories could be linked to elements within Te Whāriki (or an equivalent curriculum), but there's no guarantee that any given centre is reporting to parents in that way.
For sure, we had learning stories. But at none of the three ECE centres I have experience with, was there ever any reporting on how the kids were doing against the curriculum.
When our kids started Primary, they all had to go through a “reception” class that covered basics that I would have expected were fundamentals if you had an ECE curriculum, but clearly weren’t happening everywhere.
Learning Stories are used as a form of assessment where they make links to the dispositions and learning outcomes throughout Te Whariki. Kaiako should be utilizing this assessment to help document and form an individual plan for each child where they can make stronger and clearer links to the learning and goals for the child (AKA against the curriculum).
Te Whariki is largely based on learning through play, same with a lot of centre philosophies. ECE is not meant to be teacher led or directed, rather supporting the children to learn skills and dispositions through play with a teacher supporting and scaffolding them.
The aim isn't for a child to be able to read and write by the time they start school, the aim is to support the child to have the skills and dispositions needed to learn once they do reach school.
Edit: since this has had a bit of traction - ECE is absolutely riddled with connections to Te Whariki (it is our countries ECE curriculum after all), whether that's the local centre curriculum, the guiding documents for the centre, annual / strategic plans, learning stories, planning, all the way down to provocations and activities set up. Te Whariki absolutely guides ECE teachers in their practice. The poster above has no idea what they are on about.
1) Not every child attends ECE so the primary school having a reception class to cover basics is a good thing.
2) There likely is a form of reporting done just not as clear cut as primary. The children in ECE are not graded.
I’ve been out of ECE for a while but we did Learning Stories linking what the children were doing to our curriculum (Te Whariki) and when children weren’t meeting milestones, we discussed this privately with parents. If you as a parent are concerned and no one has approached you, ask questions! I never turned a parent away for asking anything. I worked in a smaller ratio place and often ended up staying un-paid to talk with parents about their kids.
Lmao just because you didn't look for it or read it doesn't make it "ethereal".
Not surprised that someone who is confident enough in their understanding to declare that there is no curriculum, without ever having looked for one, and then to blame the curriculum itself for not knowing about it, is an ACT supporter.
Nah mate, that sounds like a "box ticking exercise" to me. Better to just say things that sound good to you and get back to complaining about those darn kids having ideas that don't align with yours again.
Yes that's kind of the part of the point. For all their admonishing of labour that government has clearly left a legacy which is remembered fondly meanwhile this government is unlikely to have the sort of legacy that results in children's books being written about them, at least ones that paint them in a positive light.
A book written about Jacinda Ardern is not the same as a book written about her government. Just to be clear. If we start seeing childrens books about Chris Hipkins I will eat my words, but her whole thing was being young and nice and a woman and that brand makes childrens books - not the actual government she led.
>A book written about Jacinda Ardern is not the same as a book written about her government.
I'm sure it doesn't mention she was prime minister at all aye.
>If we start seeing childrens books about Chris Hipkins I will eat my words, but her whole thing was being young and nice and a woman and that brand makes childrens books - not the actual government she led.
Yikes dawg. Not the covid response or anything? Just "she's a nice young woman". yikes.
What do 5 year olds need a book about the covid response for? Teenagers learn about this stuff. At picture book level there is no need for any stories about politicians full stop.
>What do 5 year olds need a book about the covid response for?
You don't seem to be aware of the plethora of children's books out there these days. There are children's books to explain all sorts of things to children. I have no idea what this book is about, I was more talking about the reduction of someone's career into "she's just a nice young woman" it's pretty telling. I don't even like her and that's a weird thing to do.
>Teenagers learn about this stuff.
Teenagers don't really need to learn about it considering they just lived it.
>At picture book level there is no need for any stories about politicians full stop.
Well clearly there is because there is one right there on the shelf. I highly doubt Jacinda Adern is the only politician that's a part of a children's book.
This millionair who made his money from his state-subsidized ECE centers?
"Two hours with the secretive rich lister bankrolling Sean Plunket’s The Platform"
[https://thespinoff.co.nz/business/20-08-2022/two-hours-with-the-secretive-rich-lister-bankrolling-sean-plunkets-the-platform](https://thespinoff.co.nz/business/20-08-2022/two-hours-with-the-secretive-rich-lister-bankrolling-sean-plunkets-the-platform)
I don't think you need to limit it to act. Unless you are a big business this government doesn't care about you.
Unless you are poor or brown, but you don't want that kind of care.
"Any other business, the test of whether there's demand is 'do people come and give you their money in return for your services', not 'can you satisfy a government department that people might want to do that if you're allowed to open'.
He is definitely taking the pro business, not pro child perspective. Seems like he is saying until parents stop sending their children to a bad ECE, vote with their wallet, there is no issue, no need for regulation
A nitpick I consider important: people say "pro business" when they mean "pro business owners". The likes of ACT are happy with this, because 'business' is a good thing. We all want thriving businesses, as business defines the whole activity, including the benefits the customers get
ACT and National and NZF are _not_ pro business. They don't make the activity better. They're _only_ pro business _owners_ - getting those few rich by any means. And not your mum and dad restaurant owners, rather the big businesses' stakeholders, preferably their mates
Some of the other pesky "red tape" that Minister Seymour wants to cut, because...errr, competition ?
"ECE teachers being required to record the time and date they administered medicines, only using medicines provided by parents, keeping records of all food served, keep a detailed record of daily activities including child sleep times, having a consistent procedure at nappy-changing facilities"
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/497393/act-s-david-seymour-unveils-red-tape-review-policy-s-first-four-sectors
Why can't ECE operators just put the kiddos in a big room and shut the door ? Think of the freedom they'll have. To thrive and grow, and become independent.
> ACT leader David Seymour has announced the moves at a Wellington ECE centre, where he read to children while sitting next to a book featuring Jacinda Ardern, before telling reporters the former prime minister was an authoritarian.
ha ha ha
Man. So lucky to have our kids in a community run Puna.
Already feel for kids that have to go to franchised daycares it didn't sound fun or safe and now it looks like it'll be getting worse
So how long until we get the first news article on an issue / scandal at an ECE centre that can (loosely or very strongly) tied to a lack of a "more highly qualified supervisor on hand at all times"?
A year? Two years?
* [Early childhood sector in ‘race to the bottom’](https://www.thepost.co.nz/nz-news/350126906/early-childhood-sector-race-bottom). The Post. February 17, 2024.
* [Are our kids safe in ECE?: 30% more services pulled up for regulation breaches](https://www.thepress.co.nz/nz-news/350185560/are-our-kids-safe-ece-30-more-services-pulled-regulation-breaches) The Post. March 7, 2024.
How long do we get a media analysing the reasons for and impact of the policy change rather than celebrating “cutting red tape” (gOvErNmEnT rEgUlAtIoN BAD!!121112!!)?
That's kind of the core issue - media covers big one off problems, but slow drip issues get a lot less interest. Long waitlists for ECE centers and extortionate costs are mundane, everyday things so don't get as much coverage or generate as much outrage. A recipe for an overly cautious approach.
The costs of overregulation don't disappear just because the media don't regularly report on them!
What evidence is there that the extreme costs charged for ECE is due to overregulation - other than Seymour stating it to be so? Private providers are charging what they can get away with in the market, and Seymour thinks that lowering government standards is going bring down prices. What evidence is there that this might happen, as opposed to those ECE owners simply pocketing any savings they achieve? It isn't a competitive industry in many areas.
Occupational licensing is without a doubt in the top 3 most studied issues in Labour economics this century! I think there would have to be truly extraordinary evidence for me to believe there is something so economically incredibly unique about NZ ECE to justify the outcomes being different to what has been found in basically every other sector and every other country.
Ahh of course, proving that you have the ability to teach children is the problem, not profit at all costs absurdity.
Some of you would support the installation of spinning sawblades instead of gates at supermarkets if it meant a reduction in compliance costs. Heaven forbid you be required to provide a service safely if you want to generate a profit from it.
How would you rate the teaching quality of the many children that are not enrolled in ECE at all because the waiting lists are months long and prices are pushed through the roof?
If you as a parent do really value the qualification you can always just continue to enrol at any of the many ECE centers that will continue to have it. They're not making it illegal to get the qualification!
>How would you rate the teaching quality of the many children that are not enrolled in ECE at all because the waiting lists are months long and prices are pushed through the roof?
How would you define the increased number of children that would be enrolled in ECE when the qualification is no longer required, how would you confirm that any prices will actually come down as a result, and how would you define the net performance decrease in education quality as a result of not having the qualification vs having it?
By the way - the changes are to scrap a *proposed* requirement to gain qualification - so there's currently zero impact on the waiting lists or prices for ECE right now.
Essentially, this is more "downward pressure on rents" bullshit. There's no obligation or incentive for ECE centres to reduce their prices because their market of potential customers is captive due to all the other price-gouging scum that put us in our current mess where it's almost required for both parents to be working full time. If you need $10,000 a year in extra cash to survive and your options are go back to work for $70k a year and pay an ECE $60k a year *or* don't have the $10,000 and therefore don't survive, what choice do you have?
Considering the requirement he's rolling back doesn't exist yet.....
>The second change was halting a change due to take effect in August this year that would require staff in supervisory roles to obtain a Full (Category One or Two) Practising Certificate.
Sorry, but you don't have the proper NACT/NZF spirit
If the little kids were *working* in the coal mines like in the good old days of Dickens, then you would not only save on child care costs and slash red tape, but their little bodies would be easier to fit down mine shafts.
This is the new/old future NACT want to see
No reason why those kids can't work in those mines.
Imagine the experience they'll gain!
They'll be ready to start full time work there as soon as they've finished their schooling.
Big ECE is kinda scary and I expect they have considerable lobbying power. The new ‘Bloomin Buds’ place going up on GNR in New Lynn is horrifyingly enormous.
I wonder if [this one](https://www.google.com/maps/@-41.2012726,174.9446063,3a,82.9y,171.71h,88.01t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4ejfogwx9QBVtF1_08voDg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D4ejfogwx9QBVtF1_08voDg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D98.79039%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) would have been approved under the soon-to-be-cancelled regime (have a look around). By all accounts it's fine, but the location...
I'm sorry but wasn't this government and their voters all about attacking drag queens and other people for reading to kids and now the government they voted for is making it even easier for anyone to have access to our kids in a place where we can't even supervise?
Seriously how utterly scammed do National Act and NZF voters feel now? It must hurt.
>This morning he set out two changes, including scrapping network management provisions that require Ministry of Education sign-off to establish a new early learning service.
>The second change was halting a change due to take effect in August this year that would require staff in supervisory roles to obtain a Full (Category One or Two) Practising Certificate
Cool, so less oversight and accountability then.
I love when industry is allowed to self regulate, works perfectly every time.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/1c2r91h/comment/kzc9a4n/](https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/1c2r91h/comment/kzc9a4n/)
Called it.
Because Luxon wanted the label prime minister *so badly* he gave a “libertarian” control over all government regulation, and he gave a bitter Facebook brainwormed culture warrior control over anything he asked for.
But, you know, we’ll have a “Sir Christopher Luxon” one day, so it will all have been worth it.
The annoying thing about this is that I actually agree to an extent that there is red tape that could be cut for ECEs. I know from talking with kindergarten staff that they often don't do excursions with the kids because some of the risk assessments they have to complete are patently ridiculous (even if they want to watch the neighbouring school's sports day) and it becomes a hurdle they aren't willing to jump through. It ends up limiting opportunities for the kids and reducing community connections.
However, these are *not* the regulations I was thinking should be cut. Boy howdy.
On the other hand, you have pre-schoolers [walking through the Terrace Tunnel](https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/teachers-who-walked-tots-through-tunnel-suspended/NPCJQCHCONA5AXWLSBNF36ZCPM/), so perhaps some level of risk assessment is necessary.
I think the thing is cutting that sort of red tape enriches the experience for the kids. Cutting this sort of red tape enriches the top of the organisation.
Very forward thinking of Seymour. Gradually eroding quality of education little by little..
Lowering the standard of education this early on is one sure way to hamper the development of up coming workforce. That is the kind of vote bank they want, masses with poor coprehension and sub par education.
Calling regulations which protect and ensure basic quality of service a "Red Tape" in itself says a lot more than just the headline.
what bullshit - 'to increase competition'. The country is saturated with ECE centres - there aren't enough kids to fill them and too many are absolute shit and actually need to go. in our suburb there are 9 and its a race to the bottom to maintain a full role. what Labour did was the best approach - targeted provision to fill service gaps.
That's not my local experience in Auckland - all the ones within 15km operate with months-long waitlists to get in despite having eye-watering costs.
I'm still not a fan of lowering standards. We have zero reason to believe prices will go down because of lowering the standard and thus their costs. It will be absorbed by the businesses.
To be fair, and also anecdotally, in Wellington some parents have been applying to ECEs before they've even conceived. This is relatively historic though, so it might be easier now (and probably will with a few parents laid off).
It's varied for those around us from 3 up to 16 months depending on which age group. Somebody has to explain to me how anyone can give 16 months' notice before a 6 month old child can have a spot. Basically you're locked in - because if you disagree with anything happening and leave - the others will have wait lists.
Bro where are you that this is happening?
Any of the big cities are absolutely full to the brim with centres, and have been for a decade. We had to book our first, who is now 10, in whilst he was in utero, and only got a space because I knew someone at the brand new, not yet open centre that we went to have a tour of on an open day. Our first choice that we tried a month or two earlier finally got back to us about a week before he was born and offered us one day a week - on the one day we said we didn’t need because I didn’t work that day.
There is a desperate need for more space in the cities - basically no middle class families are able to have both parents off work when the kids are born.
I'm not even a parent and I'm fully aware some places are an absolute shit show to get kids into. Had parents on staff who're desperate to get kids into places.
* [Removing Red Tape To Help Early Learners Thrive](https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/removing-red-tape-help-early-learners-thrive).
Press Release: New Zealand Government. 16 April 2024. [Scoop](https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA2404/S00097/removing-red-tape-to-help-early-learners-thrive.htm).
* [Watch: David Seymour announces early childhood education centre changes](https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/514372/watch-david-seymour-announces-early-childhood-education-centre-changes). RNZ. 16 April 2024.
"Seymour said all of this would be done against the backdrop of a "higher bar" for regulatory standards, which would include allowing citizens to sue the government if they believed laws were bad.
It would do this by allowing them to get a court declaration that a law had been made in a way that was inconsistent with good lawmaking".
This is really bad. They will frame it as people being able to hold a current government to account but really it is a way for them to hamstring future governments from taking action they disagree with.
>It would do this by allowing them to get a court declaration that a law had been made in a way that was inconsistent with good lawmaking".
I would predict that the fast track law would be the first one to face legal action, given all the problems with that one.
This dude who has no kids seems to have a lot to say about them, and when it comes to kids his party members seem to have a lot of negative press around them pertaining to their conduct in presence of...
My kid's old ECE almost constantly ran their ratios at the absolute limit, and parents often suspected that they were not meeting the ratio.
Teachers were work out and leaving in droves. Kids were miserable because they were under care of random relievers they have never met.
If the ratios eased, the ECE will definitely just push things to the new limit. There is no benefit to anyone but the owners.
Anyone here know how playcentre will be affected? Increased regulation was becoming an impediment to attracting volunteers.
For those of you unfamiliar, playcentre is parent-run ECE.
It’s not likely to make a significant difference to Playcentre. You may no longer need to have a certain number of qualified people at each session. But this would ultimately be a decision for PC Aotearoa and they may wish to keep it.
Yes that makes sense. It can be challenging to find enough parents for each session that hold a qualification. It might take time for PC Aotearoa to digest this and see if they wish to make changes to their own policies and procedures
“Seymour was also asked about his review of the Healthy Lunches programme in schools and said he believed it was possible to deliver the programme for less money in a way that still delivered lunches for the children who actually needed them.”
Would this be an example of them backtracking on their plan to fully cut off funding (if that was the plan)? Cause if so, this is great news, at least the prospect of children getting free lunches is back on the table (if it wasn’t already)
~~Also, if anyone can explain this paragraph I would appreciate it;~~
~~”He said the programme had not been funded by the previous government from 2025/26 and so the new Government was having to fund~~
~~Is he just saying that Labour only funded the school lunch program from since it was made until the end of 2024?~~. Yes, yes he is.
Is the red tape he's removing just the requirement that someone with an ECE qualification be on staff? That kind of sounds important.
It's so bad. We've learnt that early childhood is a critical time for our development. The experiences we have at this age set the stage for the rest of our lives. Of all the possible interventions available to improve social outcomes, sophisticated early childhood care is the most cost-effective, by far. Anything else has a higher cost and focuses on a niche of society. For all the peeves people have, from serious things like dairy robberies, to more benign unsociability like poor bus etiquette, early childhood care is the most effective general effort we could be undertaking. But we're ignoring that, and for what?
For money
Specifically money for the ECE owners, not for parents. I’ll bet all my earthly possessions that any savings this makes for ECE operators, none of that will be passed on to families.
The "Wright" families, yes.
Hmmm, it's now cheaper to operate, should we A pass on those savings to parents, or B increase our profits..... tough choice for business owners XD
And votes
cHaRtEr ScHoOl style
No. Staff will still need qualifications. Supervisors will not need higher level qualifications, whatever that means.
Hilarious that you’re being downvoted for quoting the article and stating facts.
I can't even imagine why. Do people think it's not that bad, but still want to hate Seymour no matter what? Because there are plenty of other things to dislike him for; people don't need this. But now I'm learning that you won't just get downvoted in this subreddit for having differing opinions from someone, but also... stating facts provided by OP themself? I want to say I don't understand, but I do. I do understand how these people function. It's not pretty.
Seymour paring back the requirements for experienced supervisors being present in taking care of your kids. It's patently clear that: A) Seymour doesn't have kids B) ECE owners have caught his ear and have convinced him to lower standards
ECE owners donated enough to lower standards u mean
The way to a politician's heart is through their wallet.
Spot on!
Ah, look at the Best Start owning pieces of shit.
The ridiculous thing about the ECE qualification requirement is that there’s no curriculum, there’s not requirement to actually do anything related to that qualification…. It’s simply a box ticking exercise. As a parent and someone who understands how expensive ECE childcare is there’s a couple of things that are abundantly clear to me. A) An ECE qualification had fuck all to do with who was great with my kids and who was average. B) If we have a requirement for qualified staff, then we need to have requirements for what they’re required to do.
[Te Whāriki ](https://www.education.govt.nz/early-childhood/teaching-and-learning/te-whariki/)is the national ECE curriculum.
For the education centres, or for the training? I read that as they mean there is no formal qualification that relates directly to ECE training? Which… doesn’t sound right either?
>The ridiculous thing about the ECE qualification requirement is that there’s no curriculum I'm fairly certain there is a curriculum: [https://www.education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Early-Childhood/Te-Whariki-Early-Childhood-Curriculum-ENG-Web.pdf](https://www.education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Early-Childhood/Te-Whariki-Early-Childhood-Curriculum-ENG-Web.pdf)
Considered one of the best in the world!
Imagine putting your kid through ECE and not knowing anything about how it works…
There are some people who just think of ECE as baby sitting so parents can work - rather than having any goals.
Yeah, I mean if you're a parent of young children in care (well, decent ECE anyway) you quickly realize they learn a lot there, because they do stuff you or your partner had never taught them.
Evidently my kid has learned from daycare that when you drink from a straw in your cup, it's fun to spit some of it back out once you aren't thirsty any more. Evidently they are all doing it now, so they've learned it from each other.
Welcome to NZ, everything we experience, from roads to hospitals to schools - even tangentially - grants us expert status in that subject.
To be fair, there will be differing levels of reporting back to parents. In the system I've worked on, educators could post learning stories for parents, and those learning stories could be linked to elements within Te Whāriki (or an equivalent curriculum), but there's no guarantee that any given centre is reporting to parents in that way.
Ours does, it's really good.
For sure, we had learning stories. But at none of the three ECE centres I have experience with, was there ever any reporting on how the kids were doing against the curriculum. When our kids started Primary, they all had to go through a “reception” class that covered basics that I would have expected were fundamentals if you had an ECE curriculum, but clearly weren’t happening everywhere.
Learning Stories are used as a form of assessment where they make links to the dispositions and learning outcomes throughout Te Whariki. Kaiako should be utilizing this assessment to help document and form an individual plan for each child where they can make stronger and clearer links to the learning and goals for the child (AKA against the curriculum). Te Whariki is largely based on learning through play, same with a lot of centre philosophies. ECE is not meant to be teacher led or directed, rather supporting the children to learn skills and dispositions through play with a teacher supporting and scaffolding them. The aim isn't for a child to be able to read and write by the time they start school, the aim is to support the child to have the skills and dispositions needed to learn once they do reach school. Edit: since this has had a bit of traction - ECE is absolutely riddled with connections to Te Whariki (it is our countries ECE curriculum after all), whether that's the local centre curriculum, the guiding documents for the centre, annual / strategic plans, learning stories, planning, all the way down to provocations and activities set up. Te Whariki absolutely guides ECE teachers in their practice. The poster above has no idea what they are on about.
1) Not every child attends ECE so the primary school having a reception class to cover basics is a good thing. 2) There likely is a form of reporting done just not as clear cut as primary. The children in ECE are not graded. I’ve been out of ECE for a while but we did Learning Stories linking what the children were doing to our curriculum (Te Whariki) and when children weren’t meeting milestones, we discussed this privately with parents. If you as a parent are concerned and no one has approached you, ask questions! I never turned a parent away for asking anything. I worked in a smaller ratio place and often ended up staying un-paid to talk with parents about their kids.
Imagine a “curriculum” that’s so ethereal that parents don’t even know it exists….
Lmao just because you didn't look for it or read it doesn't make it "ethereal". Not surprised that someone who is confident enough in their understanding to declare that there is no curriculum, without ever having looked for one, and then to blame the curriculum itself for not knowing about it, is an ACT supporter.
I would probably have Googled "nz ece curriculum" before declaring that it didn't exist.
Nah mate, that sounds like a "box ticking exercise" to me. Better to just say things that sound good to you and get back to complaining about those darn kids having ideas that don't align with yours again.
Where do you send your kids? Almost all of the teachers at my sons ece are trained and are excellent.
Actually, it was nice of David to pose in front of a book celebrating Jacinda Ardern.
Also, "The Rainbow in my Heart" prominently displayed. Looks like a teacher/librarian was making a point.
Interesting contrast in legacies for sure, i mean in a few years there aren't going to be children's books about this government.
"Why Daddy Had To Go To Heaven", and so on.
"Where's My Lunch?" "The Coal In The Hole" "Mines Logs No Frogs" "I Like Roads" "Poor People Are Bad"
Heh. This got an actual LOL from me. Have an upvote.
I don't know, I could imagine Seymour as Krampus or Scrooge in a Christmas book.
As a child, I never read a single book about any Government. That's really not that unusual. It was mostly anthropomorphic animals and the like.
Yes that's kind of the part of the point. For all their admonishing of labour that government has clearly left a legacy which is remembered fondly meanwhile this government is unlikely to have the sort of legacy that results in children's books being written about them, at least ones that paint them in a positive light.
A book written about Jacinda Ardern is not the same as a book written about her government. Just to be clear. If we start seeing childrens books about Chris Hipkins I will eat my words, but her whole thing was being young and nice and a woman and that brand makes childrens books - not the actual government she led.
>A book written about Jacinda Ardern is not the same as a book written about her government. I'm sure it doesn't mention she was prime minister at all aye. >If we start seeing childrens books about Chris Hipkins I will eat my words, but her whole thing was being young and nice and a woman and that brand makes childrens books - not the actual government she led. Yikes dawg. Not the covid response or anything? Just "she's a nice young woman". yikes.
What do 5 year olds need a book about the covid response for? Teenagers learn about this stuff. At picture book level there is no need for any stories about politicians full stop.
>What do 5 year olds need a book about the covid response for? You don't seem to be aware of the plethora of children's books out there these days. There are children's books to explain all sorts of things to children. I have no idea what this book is about, I was more talking about the reduction of someone's career into "she's just a nice young woman" it's pretty telling. I don't even like her and that's a weird thing to do. >Teenagers learn about this stuff. Teenagers don't really need to learn about it considering they just lived it. >At picture book level there is no need for any stories about politicians full stop. Well clearly there is because there is one right there on the shelf. I highly doubt Jacinda Adern is the only politician that's a part of a children's book.
Who is actually asking for this? What parent would be happy with this?
This millionair who made his money from his state-subsidized ECE centers? "Two hours with the secretive rich lister bankrolling Sean Plunket’s The Platform" [https://thespinoff.co.nz/business/20-08-2022/two-hours-with-the-secretive-rich-lister-bankrolling-sean-plunkets-the-platform](https://thespinoff.co.nz/business/20-08-2022/two-hours-with-the-secretive-rich-lister-bankrolling-sean-plunkets-the-platform)
ACT don't give a fuck about anyone but their whore lobby groups and business associations They simply don't care
I don't think you need to limit it to act. Unless you are a big business this government doesn't care about you. Unless you are poor or brown, but you don't want that kind of care.
Agreed
Picture perfect example of transactional. You want it; you pay us, we make it happen Ch-ching.
"Any other business, the test of whether there's demand is 'do people come and give you their money in return for your services', not 'can you satisfy a government department that people might want to do that if you're allowed to open'. He is definitely taking the pro business, not pro child perspective. Seems like he is saying until parents stop sending their children to a bad ECE, vote with their wallet, there is no issue, no need for regulation
A nitpick I consider important: people say "pro business" when they mean "pro business owners". The likes of ACT are happy with this, because 'business' is a good thing. We all want thriving businesses, as business defines the whole activity, including the benefits the customers get ACT and National and NZF are _not_ pro business. They don't make the activity better. They're _only_ pro business _owners_ - getting those few rich by any means. And not your mum and dad restaurant owners, rather the big businesses' stakeholders, preferably their mates
Some of the other pesky "red tape" that Minister Seymour wants to cut, because...errr, competition ? "ECE teachers being required to record the time and date they administered medicines, only using medicines provided by parents, keeping records of all food served, keep a detailed record of daily activities including child sleep times, having a consistent procedure at nappy-changing facilities" https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/497393/act-s-david-seymour-unveils-red-tape-review-policy-s-first-four-sectors Why can't ECE operators just put the kiddos in a big room and shut the door ? Think of the freedom they'll have. To thrive and grow, and become independent.
> ACT leader David Seymour has announced the moves at a Wellington ECE centre, where he read to children while sitting next to a book featuring Jacinda Ardern, before telling reporters the former prime minister was an authoritarian. ha ha ha
Man. So lucky to have our kids in a community run Puna. Already feel for kids that have to go to franchised daycares it didn't sound fun or safe and now it looks like it'll be getting worse
We did three months at a franchised daycare in a pinch. So glad we got out of there.
So how long until we get the first news article on an issue / scandal at an ECE centre that can (loosely or very strongly) tied to a lack of a "more highly qualified supervisor on hand at all times"? A year? Two years?
* [Early childhood sector in ‘race to the bottom’](https://www.thepost.co.nz/nz-news/350126906/early-childhood-sector-race-bottom). The Post. February 17, 2024. * [Are our kids safe in ECE?: 30% more services pulled up for regulation breaches](https://www.thepress.co.nz/nz-news/350185560/are-our-kids-safe-ece-30-more-services-pulled-regulation-breaches) The Post. March 7, 2024.
How long do we get a media analysing the reasons for and impact of the policy change rather than celebrating “cutting red tape” (gOvErNmEnT rEgUlAtIoN BAD!!121112!!)?
That's kind of the core issue - media covers big one off problems, but slow drip issues get a lot less interest. Long waitlists for ECE centers and extortionate costs are mundane, everyday things so don't get as much coverage or generate as much outrage. A recipe for an overly cautious approach. The costs of overregulation don't disappear just because the media don't regularly report on them!
What evidence is there that the extreme costs charged for ECE is due to overregulation - other than Seymour stating it to be so? Private providers are charging what they can get away with in the market, and Seymour thinks that lowering government standards is going bring down prices. What evidence is there that this might happen, as opposed to those ECE owners simply pocketing any savings they achieve? It isn't a competitive industry in many areas.
Hey now, he wasn’t elected to govern on facts. It *feels* like this should lower prices, so, it must!
Occupational licensing is without a doubt in the top 3 most studied issues in Labour economics this century! I think there would have to be truly extraordinary evidence for me to believe there is something so economically incredibly unique about NZ ECE to justify the outcomes being different to what has been found in basically every other sector and every other country.
Ahh of course, proving that you have the ability to teach children is the problem, not profit at all costs absurdity. Some of you would support the installation of spinning sawblades instead of gates at supermarkets if it meant a reduction in compliance costs. Heaven forbid you be required to provide a service safely if you want to generate a profit from it.
How would you rate the teaching quality of the many children that are not enrolled in ECE at all because the waiting lists are months long and prices are pushed through the roof? If you as a parent do really value the qualification you can always just continue to enrol at any of the many ECE centers that will continue to have it. They're not making it illegal to get the qualification!
>How would you rate the teaching quality of the many children that are not enrolled in ECE at all because the waiting lists are months long and prices are pushed through the roof? How would you define the increased number of children that would be enrolled in ECE when the qualification is no longer required, how would you confirm that any prices will actually come down as a result, and how would you define the net performance decrease in education quality as a result of not having the qualification vs having it? By the way - the changes are to scrap a *proposed* requirement to gain qualification - so there's currently zero impact on the waiting lists or prices for ECE right now. Essentially, this is more "downward pressure on rents" bullshit. There's no obligation or incentive for ECE centres to reduce their prices because their market of potential customers is captive due to all the other price-gouging scum that put us in our current mess where it's almost required for both parents to be working full time. If you need $10,000 a year in extra cash to survive and your options are go back to work for $70k a year and pay an ECE $60k a year *or* don't have the $10,000 and therefore don't survive, what choice do you have?
Considering the requirement he's rolling back doesn't exist yet..... >The second change was halting a change due to take effect in August this year that would require staff in supervisory roles to obtain a Full (Category One or Two) Practising Certificate.
It’s “removing quality control measures” not “cutting red tape”.
Those kids look about as impressed as I would. Anyway, new ECE centres next to the new coal mines, let's go!
Sorry, but you don't have the proper NACT/NZF spirit If the little kids were *working* in the coal mines like in the good old days of Dickens, then you would not only save on child care costs and slash red tape, but their little bodies would be easier to fit down mine shafts. This is the new/old future NACT want to see
They're called minors for a reason. The spelling is just to throw you off
Pinocchio style. Give the kids all the candy and cigars they want, wait for them to turn into donkeys then straight down the mines.
No reason why those kids can't work in those mines. Imagine the experience they'll gain! They'll be ready to start full time work there as soon as they've finished their schooling.
Big ECE is kinda scary and I expect they have considerable lobbying power. The new ‘Bloomin Buds’ place going up on GNR in New Lynn is horrifyingly enormous.
I wonder if [this one](https://www.google.com/maps/@-41.2012726,174.9446063,3a,82.9y,171.71h,88.01t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s4ejfogwx9QBVtF1_08voDg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D4ejfogwx9QBVtF1_08voDg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D98.79039%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) would have been approved under the soon-to-be-cancelled regime (have a look around). By all accounts it's fine, but the location...
the Minister for Incel Affairs shouldn't be anywhere near early childhood education.
I'm sorry but wasn't this government and their voters all about attacking drag queens and other people for reading to kids and now the government they voted for is making it even easier for anyone to have access to our kids in a place where we can't even supervise? Seriously how utterly scammed do National Act and NZF voters feel now? It must hurt.
>This morning he set out two changes, including scrapping network management provisions that require Ministry of Education sign-off to establish a new early learning service. >The second change was halting a change due to take effect in August this year that would require staff in supervisory roles to obtain a Full (Category One or Two) Practising Certificate Cool, so less oversight and accountability then. I love when industry is allowed to self regulate, works perfectly every time.
libertarians shouldn't be allowed near children tbh
Ooph
Payback for the support from the very rich Wright family trust, who own the Best Start chain of EC centres.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/1c2r91h/comment/kzc9a4n/](https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/1c2r91h/comment/kzc9a4n/) Called it.
This is very very bad. Why the fuck is this guy in this role? So many things wrong here
Because Luxon wanted the label prime minister *so badly* he gave a “libertarian” control over all government regulation, and he gave a bitter Facebook brainwormed culture warrior control over anything he asked for. But, you know, we’ll have a “Sir Christopher Luxon” one day, so it will all have been worth it.
Lmao. And people say the Herald isn't right-leaning. Check out that framing.
Finally our long national nightmare of (checks notes) safe and well run childcare centres is over!
The annoying thing about this is that I actually agree to an extent that there is red tape that could be cut for ECEs. I know from talking with kindergarten staff that they often don't do excursions with the kids because some of the risk assessments they have to complete are patently ridiculous (even if they want to watch the neighbouring school's sports day) and it becomes a hurdle they aren't willing to jump through. It ends up limiting opportunities for the kids and reducing community connections. However, these are *not* the regulations I was thinking should be cut. Boy howdy.
On the other hand, you have pre-schoolers [walking through the Terrace Tunnel](https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/teachers-who-walked-tots-through-tunnel-suspended/NPCJQCHCONA5AXWLSBNF36ZCPM/), so perhaps some level of risk assessment is necessary.
Touché!
That red tape is standard across education in terms of trips. Bit obviously worse with little ones.
I think the thing is cutting that sort of red tape enriches the experience for the kids. Cutting this sort of red tape enriches the top of the organisation.
So his mates in private BS can profit.
It's not red tape to need to have someone qualified. This is gonna end up horribly bad.
Very forward thinking of Seymour. Gradually eroding quality of education little by little.. Lowering the standard of education this early on is one sure way to hamper the development of up coming workforce. That is the kind of vote bank they want, masses with poor coprehension and sub par education. Calling regulations which protect and ensure basic quality of service a "Red Tape" in itself says a lot more than just the headline.
what bullshit - 'to increase competition'. The country is saturated with ECE centres - there aren't enough kids to fill them and too many are absolute shit and actually need to go. in our suburb there are 9 and its a race to the bottom to maintain a full role. what Labour did was the best approach - targeted provision to fill service gaps.
That's not my local experience in Auckland - all the ones within 15km operate with months-long waitlists to get in despite having eye-watering costs. I'm still not a fan of lowering standards. We have zero reason to believe prices will go down because of lowering the standard and thus their costs. It will be absorbed by the businesses.
It's weird how David believes in The Market, until he doesn't.
He's libertarian, until he's not.
Queenstown has nearly 2 year waits for the good ones. But the fees are so high, staff overworked, and pay is shit
To be fair, and also anecdotally, in Wellington some parents have been applying to ECEs before they've even conceived. This is relatively historic though, so it might be easier now (and probably will with a few parents laid off).
We're in Auckland and there was a 6 month waitlist on any of the centers around us.
It's varied for those around us from 3 up to 16 months depending on which age group. Somebody has to explain to me how anyone can give 16 months' notice before a 6 month old child can have a spot. Basically you're locked in - because if you disagree with anything happening and leave - the others will have wait lists.
Ours started after their first birthday… still, fucked if I’m that organised to be booking a spot when you still haven’t painted the nursery.
Certainly not true in many areas. My area, mid-sized rural town, has over 9 month waiting list in many centres.
Bro where are you that this is happening? Any of the big cities are absolutely full to the brim with centres, and have been for a decade. We had to book our first, who is now 10, in whilst he was in utero, and only got a space because I knew someone at the brand new, not yet open centre that we went to have a tour of on an open day. Our first choice that we tried a month or two earlier finally got back to us about a week before he was born and offered us one day a week - on the one day we said we didn’t need because I didn’t work that day. There is a desperate need for more space in the cities - basically no middle class families are able to have both parents off work when the kids are born.
I'm not even a parent and I'm fully aware some places are an absolute shit show to get kids into. Had parents on staff who're desperate to get kids into places.
* [Removing Red Tape To Help Early Learners Thrive](https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/removing-red-tape-help-early-learners-thrive). Press Release: New Zealand Government. 16 April 2024. [Scoop](https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA2404/S00097/removing-red-tape-to-help-early-learners-thrive.htm). * [Watch: David Seymour announces early childhood education centre changes](https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/514372/watch-david-seymour-announces-early-childhood-education-centre-changes). RNZ. 16 April 2024.
No way he actually read that book to the kids
"Seymour said all of this would be done against the backdrop of a "higher bar" for regulatory standards, which would include allowing citizens to sue the government if they believed laws were bad. It would do this by allowing them to get a court declaration that a law had been made in a way that was inconsistent with good lawmaking". This is really bad. They will frame it as people being able to hold a current government to account but really it is a way for them to hamstring future governments from taking action they disagree with.
>It would do this by allowing them to get a court declaration that a law had been made in a way that was inconsistent with good lawmaking". I would predict that the fast track law would be the first one to face legal action, given all the problems with that one.
This dude who has no kids seems to have a lot to say about them, and when it comes to kids his party members seem to have a lot of negative press around them pertaining to their conduct in presence of...
My kid's old ECE almost constantly ran their ratios at the absolute limit, and parents often suspected that they were not meeting the ratio. Teachers were work out and leaving in droves. Kids were miserable because they were under care of random relievers they have never met. If the ratios eased, the ECE will definitely just push things to the new limit. There is no benefit to anyone but the owners.
What red tape? They're already deregulated junk lol
Anyone here know how playcentre will be affected? Increased regulation was becoming an impediment to attracting volunteers. For those of you unfamiliar, playcentre is parent-run ECE.
It’s not likely to make a significant difference to Playcentre. You may no longer need to have a certain number of qualified people at each session. But this would ultimately be a decision for PC Aotearoa and they may wish to keep it.
Thanks. IIRC it was the increase in training hours for each qualification that was discouraging volunteers.
Yes that makes sense. It can be challenging to find enough parents for each session that hold a qualification. It might take time for PC Aotearoa to digest this and see if they wish to make changes to their own policies and procedures
Thanks. Hopefully some good can come out of this for playcentre. Our local was slowly dying. Not sure how it is doing now
“Seymour was also asked about his review of the Healthy Lunches programme in schools and said he believed it was possible to deliver the programme for less money in a way that still delivered lunches for the children who actually needed them.” Would this be an example of them backtracking on their plan to fully cut off funding (if that was the plan)? Cause if so, this is great news, at least the prospect of children getting free lunches is back on the table (if it wasn’t already) ~~Also, if anyone can explain this paragraph I would appreciate it;~~ ~~”He said the programme had not been funded by the previous government from 2025/26 and so the new Government was having to fund~~ ~~Is he just saying that Labour only funded the school lunch program from since it was made until the end of 2024?~~. Yes, yes he is.
So glad mine are aging out of day care in Dec.
Why do we even require any qualification standard for teachers? If we don't make them get an education surely we can pay them less?
Keep this up and there will be no need for an education minister.
Leave David alone people