NEWSLETTER: KeyNotes # 13 - Rt Hon John Key

34 Comments
29 June 2007
NEWSLETTER: KeyNotes # 13

Putting Trades and Industry back into our schools

Technology training in schools is in crisis. Schools are being forced to cancel or reduce their trades training programmes. There is a shortage of teachers, and a lack of resources and direction from the Government. School kids keen on developing their practical skills are missing out.

At the same time, our skills shortage gets worse. This stops many firms expanding their businesses. It creates bottlenecks in the economy. While industry cries out for workers to fill highly-skilled, highly-paid positions, employers report that many school leavers don't have the basic skills they need.

And so last week I announced some initiatives that we will pursue to improve trades and industry training in our schools. These include:

- Piloting a school-based apprenticeships scheme, similar to the one run successfully in Australia.
- Working with teachers and industry to increase the pool of people able to teach trades and technology classes.
- Encouraging business and industry to help provide schools with resources for trades training.
- Funding a select group of schools to run "Trades Academies" – centres of excellence that specialise in providing students with learning opportunities relevant to a career in trades or industry.
- Giving schools more flexibility to offer their students trades and industry training outside the school gates.

These are just some of the things we are looking at, and you can expect more details in coming months. Read the full text of my speech and comment here.

Labour's bracket creep

Click here to listen to my interview with Wallace Chapman on Kiwi FM about wage growth, bracket creep and why real wages are growing more slowly here than in Australia. I'd appreciate your feedback on these issues.

Balancing the environment and the economy

Last weekend I spoke to Forest & Bird about how I want to grow our economy while protecting the environment. We can do both, but we need to get our priorities right and make sensible decisions about what is important to us.

National's 50 by 50 policy sets a target of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 50%, compared to 1990 levels, by 2050. The electricity sector offers significant potential to cut emissions, but we need to make it easier for generators to invest in renewable energy.

At present, sensible hydro, windfarm and geothermal developments are mired in red tape, while state-owned power stations burn more coal and gas than ever before. This makes a mockery of Labour's climate change credibility.

That's why I support restarting the Dobson Dam hydro project on the West Coast. The flooding of a small piece of land seems a small price to pay for the long-term reduction in greenhouse gas emissions that will result.

Trade-offs are a part of sensible environmental and economic decision-making. They are tough and they carry a cost, but if we want to lift our economic game and protect our environment, we can't shying away from making them.

Read my full speech to Forest & Bird and comment here.

20 hours free - for a fee

At the last election Labour promised to provide 20 hours free early childhood education (ECE) to all 3-and-4-year olds by July 1 2007. Parents assumed free meant just that – free, at no cost, without a charge.

But while some 3-and-4-year-olds will receive 20 hours of ECE funded by the government, many parents will be obliged to pay "optional" fees to cover the true cost of this "free" education.

This is not the 20 hours free ECE that Labour promised. It is 20 hours for a fee.

Add to that the tens of thousands of Kiwi parents whose kids can't get into an ECE centre because there's no space, and it's clear that '20 hours free' is a fraud – and yet another of Labour's broken election promises.

National will do a better job of pre-school Education. We will clean up Labour's mess. We will deliver the $140 million the Government has allocated to the sector in a way that is fair and honest. And, if we promise that something is free, we'll make sure it doesn't come with a fee.

Are you a parent of a 3-or-four-year-old? What do you think of '20 hours free'? Let me know your thoughts here.

John Key MP
Leader of the National Party

Posted by admin in Newsletter Trackbacks: (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

#1 - Vicki Honeyfield 2007-06-29 19:10 - (Reply)

Hi I am a working mum with four children. I would like to know if the governments new 20 hours free is for stay at home mums as well? As their seems to be no room left in centres for us working mums. Did labour think about this when they introduced the new 20 hours free. It is amazing at the overwhelming response day care centres have had with the increase in children they have coming through their doors. It is hard enough for mums who are working to find reliable centres but now it is virtually impossible and I know of friends who have had to turn down job offers as they can not find anywhere to place their children since the introduction of 20 hours free. If you could introduce a policy that would benefit all mums then please go for it. I am one of the lucky mums in my area and have a lady who works from home who minds children. But their is a huge shortage for this type of care. Come on Labour what were you thinking or once again not thinking.

#2 - Amy 2007-06-29 19:48 - (Reply)

"National will do a better job of pre-school Education. We will clean up Labour's mess. We will deliver the $140 million the Government has allocated to the sector in a way that is fair and honest. And, if we promise that something is free, we'll make sure it doesn't come with a fee." Good to hear you will do a better job, but it would be useful if you actually said how you are planning to do this. You let us know who *hasn't* done a good job, and you tell us what you *won't* do, but what will National actually do to address pre-school education and childcare problems?

#3 - ross mclean 2007-06-29 21:09 - (Reply)

Hi John .. I couldn't find where to comment on another issue .. so thought somebody will pick it up here. Kiwisaver .. Seems that Helen's team only apply no discrimination on age when it suits them .. hardly surprising? My accountant tells me that those 65 and over do not qualify for the $1000 (bribe) to join the Kiwisaver scheme. Is this discrimination, or what? Cheers, Ross McLean

#4 - Tom Taylor 2007-06-29 22:48 - (Reply)

Balancing the environment and the economy: The proposals only cover the energy supply side and don't consider moderating demand i.e putting in place policies and actions to encourage NZ businesses to be more energy efficient. This has worked in California over the last 32 years with policies that originated when Ronald Reagan was Governor (not exactly a raving leftie!). Since then California's energy use per head has flatlined but that hasn't stopped them being the world's 5th or 6th biggest economy (depending on who's figures you use). As it is the only Party pushing for energy efficiency in NZ is the Green Party. Labour doesn't see it as important and neither does National as it does not rate a mention in your KeyNotes. Until NZ business is challenged over it's resource and energy inefficiency it won't respond. Tell each NZ business to contact 3M or Marks and Spencers (they're not 'noddy' companies) so they can see what can be done and add to company viability. Mollycoddling doesn't make for effective management or encourage innovation.

#5 - Jenny Smith 2007-06-29 23:33 - (Reply)

Hi I am a stay at home mum who can not get her 3 year old into kindy - I've been given estimations of 3.5 maybe 3.4. I know of some kids who got in at 3.7. This is rediculous. There is also the problem of moving up when you are 4 - I know of some children not moving to 5 mornings a week until they were 4.5. I have looked at other options such as the 20 free hours at creche facilities but there's just no spaces or you have to pay $60 and do at least 2 full days and have them there over the holiday break. I am sorry I don't want to pay to have my child there over the holidays that's my time with them. I have no options and my child is missing out. I would suggest that you put funding and thinking around what resources are actually required instead of straining those that are currently there - this is a rediculous situation for stay at home and working mums and a simple bid for the simple voter!

#6 - Gendi 2007-06-30 07:41 - (Reply)

Our local kindy will take up the 'free' offer and now my daughter will get 7.5 hours at only .50c an hour. Free with a fee. I asked them when she would be able to get 20 hours and when it would be free and was told that we would have to use the other hours at another centre, but it would still have charges. Plus because of the waiting lists, it is at least 6 months to get into another centre in our area and the free fees are bigger! When she is about 4.5 she will get 17 hours at kindy for .50c an hour, but the hours are very inconvenient and inflexible and it is not free! Used to be about $1 an hour, not half price only. Plus the amount of actual pre school work done with the kids is mimimal.

#7 - Graeme Bolger 2007-06-30 08:28 - (Reply)

Free education is great but does it have value? When someting is free is by implacation not as valuable as something that you pay for. Like many I beleive in free education but I don't belive in freeing up perintal responcibility to educate a child. The 20 hours Free should be for education not play time.

#7.1 - Bronwyn Tiddy 2007-06-30 12:42 - (Reply)

Graeme you seem to be saying that children at Kindy and preschool are only playing therefore it is a waste of money providing for them - or did i misunderstand your comment? Children learn through play. Those early years are vital for their growth and development.

#7.1.1 - Vicki 2009-02-27 20:12 - (Reply)

I agree with Bronwyn that play can be one of the best forms of learning. I find myself a little put off with Graemes comment that we are sending our children to centre for 20 hours and therefore giving up our parental responsibility. I am a working mum with four children and would love to be able to afford to stay at home and spend more time with them. But in todays financial era we all know its just not affordable. Nearly gone are the days where mum stays at home while dad goes off to work. Both parents need to work today to cover the ever increasing cots of just surviving.

#8 - Timothy M Hutton 2007-06-30 09:03 - (Reply)

WRT - 20 Hrs Free Day Care. The point that you will make it work where the opposition hasn't is what those affected want to hear. But to the broader populace, it amounts to partial state funding, and a reversal of policies where state funding has been reduced or stopped altogether. Accordingly the need for State funding needs to be given stronger justification, and not just a denunciation of how the Opposition has failed to live up to its promises.

#9 - Bronwyn Tiddy 2007-06-30 12:38 - (Reply)

The Labour Govt certainly didnt think this through. If you are going to do better please remember Home Based Childcare providers. The 20 free hours certainly doesn't work for us. It may work for shared care, but for Nannies in homes it wont. Our centre would go broke very quickly if we joined up. There is a huge shortage of early childhood teachers, the country needs to address that before making rash and unworkable promises.

#10 - Wes Wernicki 2007-06-30 14:33 - (Reply)

The ‘free’ childcare has significant flaws in its implementation, but bottom line - it can be the equivalent of a $5-6,500 p.a. pay rise for each 3-5 year old in care (depending on the family income and hours in care). It usually has a significant impact on the family budget and for that reason alone it is a vote-winning move. But does it address the need of providing support for all families? Probably not, so then what is National’s policy on balancing the deficiencies of this system? My expectation is that this redistribution of income is going to be difficult to disestablish unless it is overwritten by a more comprehensive package of family and child support payments funded by taxation (or less tax with less government intervention). Either way, the voters in the political centre will likely go with whichever party that has the best offer on the table at the time. So, let's sort out the policy.

#11 - Helen 2007-06-30 14:45 - (Reply)

Hi John I work 27 hours a week and have children aged almost 6, 4 and a half, and 3. My two youngest children should 'theoretically' be eligible for the 20hours free kindy....but it is an absolute JOKE!!. The pre-school they attend has not joined in the scheme, and when I did track down a kindy that did accept the scheme AND had places for both of them the cost of the extra hours needed to cover the hours I work meant that I would be paying a total of $3 per week less! Thats right I would still be paying around $160 per week for the 3 days of pre-school. Most working mothers I know cannot fit our work around the rigid times of the public kindegarten system - so really there is no choice but to go to a private kindegarten. So our children will stay put and my husband and I will continue to foot the bill, while working and paying taxes to a Government that refuses to give anything back (we have never received subsidies for any childcare (OSCAR), working for families etc....). ....AND, while I am on the education bandwagon - whatever happened to the promise about child/teacher ratios in primary school? My 5 (almost 6 year old) is considered Year 1 and is in a class of 26 children! How can any teacher cope with that number of children across the broad spectrum of abilities at that age? There seems to be a lot of talk and empty promises, not much being delivered by the current Government....

#12 - Melissa 2007-06-30 15:32 - (Reply)

I would think to make it fair to all the hard working families that instead of an hour value there could be a stepped subsidy for each child and make it in proportion to the hours required by working parents. So those who are contributing more in their tax will see some benefit from long hard years of studying, working and sacrificing. At the moment under labor it is becoming apparent to me the more I aspire to be the more they will take from me. This Robin Hood tactic is making me want to take my skills overseas where I might retain more earnings and don't we already have a shortage of skilled workers ?

#13 - Tony 2007-06-30 18:50 - (Reply)

I asked the question below a while back and I've also emails it direct, but there's been no response yet - no problem, I know you're busy - but I'm repeating it here as I'd relly like your comments. Thanks. I may be missing something and if I am I hope you can enlighten me... I keep hearing comments that the Reserve Bank is merely using the only tools it has to try and keep inflation within the 1-3% band. But who sets the band limits? Isn't that set by the government? What would happen if the band was set at say 1-6%? Isn't inflation a 'not so bad' thing in a growth economy? Wouldn't a change in the band mean that the RBNZ would no longer be 'forced' into lifting the OCR in an attempt to stop house prices rising, a forlorn task when our property values have grown far less over the last ten years than almost all our major trading partners? Wouldn't that then mean that interest rates would fall? Wouldn't it follow that the dollar would fall? Wouldn't that be good for exporters? Have we allowed ourselves to get trapped by a inflation band goal that doesn't reflect the current economic climate? As I said earlier, I'm probably missing something basic here.... tell me if I am. please.

#14 - Steve 2007-06-30 19:37 - (Reply)

For our family the largest issue is the massive influx of immigration and foreign ownership of our land and houses. The cost of living now and cost of buying a house is rediculous. Some talk of the skills shortage in New Zealand but I have skills and would like to stay in New Zealand but am reaching the stage where my professionaly salary just won't cover the cost of living. My wife could work but when tax, cost of childcare and other costs associated with work are taken into account we may only save approx $4K pa if she works fulltime. We feel trapped and absolutely gutted at how immigrants are taking over our land and housing. Regards Steve

#15 - Deb Whytock said:
2007-06-30 22:03 - (Reply)

20 hours free - for a fee - everything comes for a fee nothing is free in life but how about giving a whole lot more support to those mothers who are at home mothers - there seems to be no dollar value in that - (most of us don't do it for the dollar value anyway otherwise we would be working) - I'm one of those and feel undervalued in society due to the fact I get no help - my partner works big hours so that I can be at home for the kids, and they can do all the after school activities that happen every night of the week - our choice but totally worth the experiences our children are getting - what dollar value is that - the hardest part is not having their dad around to experience all the wonderful things they do as he is always working!!!

#16 - Naomi Syred 2007-06-30 23:21 - (Reply)

Re childcare, I have 4 children now past this age, but would like to see National demonstrate more support for families like funding plunket, parent port, parents inc etc rather than attempting to fund childcare. Parents need support rather than increased intervention. So if we had reduced tax, we could choose ourselves how to spend it on our children.

#17 - Gary 2007-07-01 09:39 - (Reply)

What is it that Clark, Cullen, and Maharey do not understand about the word ‘free’? We have all assumed it meant ‘without cost, payment, or charge’, and ‘provided without, or not subject to, a charge or payment’. How silly of us!

#18 - Liz 2007-07-01 11:28 - (Reply)

I would really like to see other EC centres included in the 20 hours free education, such as playcentres. Why disadvantage parents that want to be involved in their childs education?

#19 - Sarah-Jane McCosh 2007-07-01 12:01 - (Reply)

I'm a full-time mum with 4 yr old and 6 yr old (and director of our own business - which means 'work' all day then work at night too). I chose the Playcentre route, however, as I wanted direct involvement in my children's early childhood education. Playcentre puts resources into parent education as well as childhood education and as such is a really positive force for parenting skills in the community, as well as providing a sense of wider community and family. The current government seems to believe day care is better at raising children than parents - but in which case, why not put more money into organisations like Playcentre who actually seek to upskill parents and provide community support. I've heard stories where the '20-free-hours' effectively forces children into daycare for this many hours (even if this isn't actually what the parent wanted - which not every one does) because that's the only way they can make the funding work. If you don't do the full 20 hours it costs more. Playcentre, incidentally, only charges families a donation which makes it more 'free' than the other '20-free-hours' ECE providers.

#19.1 - Trevor Ball 2009-05-25 19:17 - (Reply)

Hi Sarah- Jane- I am not sure if this a resonable response to your question and given that I don't know, I am fairly sure that this is you, rimg me- [phone numbers deleted, message forwarded to original commenter - ADMIN] [Additional ADMIN edit: Sarah-Jane advises that she can be contacted through the Old Friends network.] Cheers Trevor Ball

#20 - David Scott said:
2007-07-01 12:19 - (Reply)

My wife and I pay to send our 3 & 4 year old girls to Montessori. We voted against the 20 'free' hours at our Montessori in support of the owner and staff due the the extra paperwork load that it takes to manage AND because the optional fee is just that, optional. If parents choose not to pay the optional fee then the school is out of pocket. Less money, less resources and quality of care drops. Labour seems to give these negative incentives in many areas of society.

#21 - Clare 2007-07-02 07:57 - (Reply)

I'm a full time working mum with two children (2 & 3yrs). I employ a nanny and my son attends day care two mornings a week for interaction with other children and learning. This has been working really well and his learning is advancing ten fold so the pressure to make ends meet is worth it. I was delighted when the nannies agency offered us the ECE program (A reduced hourly rate). I thought Labour has final got it right until we recieved a phone call from the day care saying that they were also able to offer a reduced rate for the ECE program. Went down there for a forced meeting only to be told that we had to increase our sons hours from 6 to 9 a week, there would be no more make up days, if we were ever late we would be charged by the minute. Well after listening to this I thought what a joke and said we would not join the scheme, that's fine thay said he still needs to come for a min of 9 hrs and your fees have tripled. Talk about being forced into something. In short we now loose subsidy from the nanny's agency and overall I am now paying more for childs care. also if a full timer comes in and the center is full the part timers get chucked out. When my daughter turns two, the nanny's agency looses most of their current subsidy which is past back on to me, so I want to know why 2yr olds are not included as the government reduces subsidies at this age. So overall I am now paying more for child care. The thing that also annoys me, is we pay for the government so why don't they work better for us. The people have the power (United we stand, divided we fall) New Zealanders need to stand up for what is right, I mean what about the 86 year old lady that was left at North Shore hospitals Emergency Ward in the hall way for three days with a nappy on and nothing to eat or drink and I hear nothing is going to be done. She worked all her life and then to be treated so poorly is unjust. And what about that little boy that was beated to death by his parents after being taken away from a loving care giver (to him his mum) . I mean who in their right mind would take a way a little boy after 3 years and give him back to a family (cold turkey) he did not know. If at all, it should have been done gradually with his care giver. The Governement has a lot to answer for. I pray that when National becomes the new Government they will start listening to the people and that the people of NZ will stand up and be counted.

#22 - Mark 2007-07-02 08:38 - (Reply)

I have a 4 year old daughter. I was very surprised that we actually qualified for something; normally we are just outside any criteria. Our day care centre did their sums and they are better off by 1c per hour, so we are not expecting any extra fees. She is off to Kindy soon, they are much worse off, so I gather we will have to pay something there. Even if we have to pay something, we are still better off than what we were.

#23 - David Grant 2007-07-02 09:40 - (Reply)

Good morning Mr Key, Maharey talks of the fee part and uses extra science expriment equipment (part of the curriculum!) as a reason why some pre schoolers will have to still pay for their free childcare. I am stunned as to what extra costs 3 and 4 years old can possibly incur. Expensive trips? surely not, expensive equipment, what exactly blocks, playdough or is it a high tech wayter tray? Or perhaps it is some new high tech spelling tool so that our young of the future realise that fee and free are different words with very different meanings unlike our current govt. Also does this not seriously set up our Early Childhood teachers to vainly attempt to justify a mythical policy?

#24 - Lucas Bonné 2007-07-02 14:06 - (Reply)

20 hours free? Just give us a subsidy that can be used in any preschool. This will alleviate all pressures, give parents choice and make the system fairer.

#24.1 - Andrea 2007-07-02 15:03 - (Reply)

I agree with this - the current debacle over some in some out, some charging extra, some not, some flexible, some not, is causing all sorts of rifts and arguments, between centres, committee members and parents. Giving a simple hourly rate subsidy on proof of payment/enrolment for up to 20 hours could be easily and quickly implemented, giving it free to those enrolled in a centre charging under the offered charge but allowing parents who choose (or have to go to) a more expensive centre the same benefit. All the centre would have to do is provide a receipt! Why on earth waste everyone's time by doing it this way?!

#25 - Julie 2007-07-02 23:25 - (Reply)

I agree with most comments made so far. This new ECE scheme has not been thoroughly thought through. I have a 4 yr old boy who needs this interaction with other children as he is the only one at home. My husband and I also run our own Company so any hours I can grab during the day or night to do work is essential. My boy goes to both Public Kindy and to an Early Learning Centre. Both are independent but work in with each other as they are almost next door to each other. This is great, this allows parents to benefit from both without having to drop everything and run backwards and forwards. I personally don't have a problem with paying the option charges as I feel it is important that the level of education stays the way it is. BUT free should be free!! Our public Kindy has many costs, $400 for paint in one month alone and there is the costs for the Computers, paper, replacement of chalks, crayons, etc. This is before you even talk of possible field trips or special projects. (eg our Kindy celebrated Mahariki Maori New Year with a feast of potatoes and Kumera and another day Maori bread along with special activities) For those that think Kindy and Daycare is for just playing, I suggest they take a look at what actually goes on now in Kindy's. My son can take a digital photo, download it to the computer and print it. I know some don't do this, but the funding from the government should reflect the real value of what is being given to our children not a standard set fee. There should be thought put in to this and it should be for all. Currently only those who have been attending for some time are likely to benefit and those that haven't will have to sit on the waiting list. The administration for the Centres to run this must be a nightmare!! They are teachers not office administrators and most will probably rely on the help of willing helpers. I know the two that my son attends are dreading the paperwork. In school Holidays my son increases his hrs in Early Learning Centre whilst Kindy is on Holiday which means each term alterations need to be made and we are not the only family to do this in our community. Perhaps, as I have read, the subsidy could be reimbursed to the parents after sending in the invoices/receipts as long as there is no decrease in bulk funding to the kindy's and daycare centres. Whatever happens though, my son will stay with the same out of home parttime care that he has had mostly as he has grown and is learning and that is the important factor. He attends Kindy and Early Learning Centre primarily for basic learning, interaction with others and the bonus means I can be at home working on the business in those times so that when he is at home, it is quality time focused more on him. If it costs me less - great, if it costs more - fine we'll pay it. We must remember the focus, FREE EDUCATION FOR ALL OUR CHILDREN SO THEY CAN GROW TO THEIR FULL POTENTIAL. This is about them!!

#26 - Yvonne 2007-07-03 22:02 - (Reply)

20 Hours Free - Will the new government compensate those parents who currently qualify for the "free" early childhood education lolly, but whose day care centre is unable to offer it? My receipt to the amount of $13,500 (for two pre-schoolers attending a centre for 20 hours a week) will be available as proof of payment.

#27 - Lisa Grogan 2007-07-04 16:03 - (Reply)

20 Hours Free - Yes, my son's daycare is offering this. However they put fee's up from $205pw to $215pw to cover this. With the 20hours free I pay around $168pw. However this morning I was asked to fill in another form and tick a box YES or NO regarding paying 1.75 per hour for those 20 free hours. This is an extra $35pw which would put me back up to $203pw - HARDLY FREE!? This makes no sense - why even bother at all!!??

#28 - Sarah 2008-10-08 17:43 - (Reply)

Hi John I manage an Early Childhood Centre. My waiting list is at least two years long. While Free ECE is great for children and getting them into Early Childhood it concerns me that all people are entitled to it. Surely it should be for working people who are paying taxes. Why should people on benefits be entitled to this and others are missing out. Thanks

#29 - Teresa McGhee 2008-11-19 14:09 - (Reply)

I am sick of people saying that it is free 'childcare', it is ment to be free 'early childhood education'. Yes children learn through play, but they can play at home. If my child is at a professional facility I want my child to be taught. At almost 4years she is very interested in reading and writing, and will count almost anything she sees. I feel that the '20hrs free ece' has dumbed down the preschools and kindys that were actually teaching kids. At the price that the government is paying it is just not feasiable to hire enough qualified preschool teachers to actually have one-on-one time with the children.

#30 - Paul 2009-04-22 13:24 - (Reply)

I am confused and perhaps someone or Mr Key can help. In Nationals childcare policy it states that a tax refund will be eligable up to a maximum of $1650 per child yet the current ird tax rebates indicate a maximum of $310 it doesnt add up to me. What tax breaks are there if any for higher income earners paying even higher nanny salaries so it sometimes seems pointless returning to the workforce when nearly as much money is paid to a nanny than is earned after tax. Are there any other tax credits one can apply for ie as we are employers is the car the nanny uses the office space we need to keep her in employment, the phone etc all tax deductable?

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above:
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry
Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.