National views education as a low priority. What implications will have on young kiwis further down the track ?

Pete #48 I agree that she shouldn't have said that and I have not been particularly happy with how she has handled her portfolio. However I think it is wrong to put in quotes like this when times have obviously changed significantly. There is no one who can predict recessions and how bad they will get.

Absolutely Benny #49 and most of us are happy with how it's going!!

You guys voted for National so what do you expect!!

Richard #46

To make this statement in August 2008, when we already knew the economy was in the throes of giving way was idioctic - at best, a downright lie, and an election ploy at worst (remember tax cuts north of $50 too Richard? A lie contradicted by common sense and economic reason at the time too).

Also, I'm not a Labour supporter, so I can't really answer your hypothetical, but it sounds to me like you are someone who listens to the vox-pops rather than the substance.

Personally I'd like to see rational savings made that benefit the people who are worst off in our society first, and those of us able to support ourselves more easily last. I'd also like changes made based of evidence that they will work, not based on "back office beaureucracy vs frontline services" when the reality is not a simple dichotomy.

I am applaud by the fact that they are classing special education as an area of low priority? My daughter has special needs and is ORRS funded but there are so few people on the ground to provide to her needs. Special Education Services are so understaffed in my region, particularly in regards to support services for Maori children with special needs. I do believe, however, that special needs funding allocations within the ECE sector needs to change- my daughter didnt need all those hours as a toddler/pre-schooler, its now that she is at primary school that she needs it! she now gets half the hours she use to when she was in preschool. Funding simply needs to be shuffled and used where it is most needed but not taken away- if my daughter looses any more hours that I fought hard for Anne will know about it!

Come on Pete #44 times have changed significantly since then. We have had a recession and now our debt is rising. Labour supporters cry over funding cuts on the one hand and then complain because we are borrowing so much on the other. Well what is it Labourites? Do we borrow more or try to make savings? I bet that there is no Labour supporter who can answer that because they think we should be doing both! You can't have your cake and eat it to!

Kevin #37 in an ideal world yes they would not need funding but some of these schools are in a absolute dire state financially. They absolutely have to be kept open otherwise we are in trouble. I once heard a stat (not to sure if it is correct) that it is cheaper for the government to fund a student to go through private school then to fund them through the public system. People should stop complaining about funding going to private schools.

Interesting this: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0808/S00055.htm

Anne Tolley MP National Party Education Spokeswoman 5 August 2008

PM wrong – No cuts to education spend under National

Helen Clark is making mischief by suggesting National will cut education spending to fund tax cuts says National’s Education spokeswoman, Anne Tolley.

“Even the Prime Minister admits she was just guessing when she made the comment.

“I can tell you categorically that National will not cut spending to education

“We are committed to increasing education funding at the same rate that Labour has budgeted for, and we will work to see more of that spent on schools and less on bureaucracy.

“This is pure scaremongering from Labour.

“Helen Clark is desperately plucking theories out of the air when she suggests National will put more of the funding burden on to students and families.

“Let me say it again. National will not cut spending to education.

“I can not make it any clearer than that.”

I can help the minister identify some of the 'faceless paper shufflers' she can sack to make the savings! Hidden deep in the national office of the MOE are a group of anonymous (faceless) ministry 'people' who advise the minister on things they know little about. A glaring example of this is the school review system, especially the Masterton rationalisation decision, where the advice given to the minister (then Mallard but what has changed?) was so false and wrong it not only closed successful schools but cost the taxpayer millions to try and prop up the flawed decision. Sack them and you can save the $25M you need in one go Mrs Tolley!