Education for all New Zealanders, not for profit Many kiwis living in regional towns and small rural communities must have a sense of déjà vu. I’m thinking of those kiwis that lived through the 1980s and 1990s when rural and regional post offices, schools, and hospitals were ‘rationalised’ and closed; those who watched as state assets were sold without regard to what that meant for telephone and power services to their communities; those who were ignored because these actions had to be taken to ‘balance the country’s books’. Roll on 2012. Another government is looking to balance the country’s books and again it seems the cost of this will hit rural communities hard. Some of the austerity measures – such as state asset sales – have made headlines around New Zealand. But what about some of the other costs of austerity budgets which are often hidden away from public scrutiny? For example, we need to examine the cost of the government’s deliberate underfunding of tertiary education provision in smaller communities around the country. The amount money the government spends on tertiary education around New Zealand has fallen over the last few years at the very time when the number of students has risen (in part the growth in student numbers is due to attempts by New Zealanders to get themselves off growing dole queues). The government’s underfunding is so severe that by 2014 the gap between the cost of providing quality tertiary education in New Zealand and the amount of money the government invests in education will be $1.1bn. And our regional polytechnics are feeling the financial squeeze the most felt. is. Annual reports show that last year government funding to twelve of New Zealand’s polytechnics fell 4.4 percent or $17 million. The polytechnics that have been the worst hit by 2011 funding cuts were regional polytechnics such as Aoraki in Timaru, where the government grant fell by 19 per cent or $4 million, Te Tai Poutini in Westport where the grant fell by 14 per cent or $3 million, and NorthTec in Whangarei where the government grant fell by 13 per cent or $4 million. So what does this mean in real terms? It means there are fewer staff and crowded classrooms; it means courses in small communities being cut altogether because they are ‘uneconomic’.
1
It means that in one regional polytechnic 50 students were booked into a classroom with only 40 desks and chairs, leaving 10 students had to sit on the floor during classes. All in the name of making the diminishing government funding go further. At yet another institution, 30 trades’ students are put into a workshop with 12 workbenches. This means less hands-on learning for future tradespeople who will build our homes, repair our cars, and fix our drains. For other communities it means those courses that were taught in the local hall, church, or marae are closing and students are being told to do the work ‘on-line’ or to take the course at the polytechnic’s main campus, 100 km away. All well and good if you have fast-speed broadband and a computer. All well and good if you have public transport or can afford the petrol to run your private car into the polytechnic’s main campus. In the austerity approach to education it seems that ordinary kiwis, their families, and their communities are going to end up missing out on the benefits that come from being able to complete a tertiary qualification. Polytechnics don’t want this outcome for their students, but the government repeatedly tells them that they must do more with less. It is the government, not the chief executives and staff at polytechnics, which undervalues a decent education. New Zealanders need to speak up and defend their regional polytechnics before the deliberate underfunding by the government shuts down higher education opportunities for kiwis living in small rural communities. And is the pain being inflicted on people wanting a decent education really necessary? Do we really need to see students being squeezed into overcrowded classrooms, cuts to the numbers of tertiary staff, or closures of courses in small and regional communities? The Minister of Tertiary Education, Stephen Joyce, says there is no money for tertiary education because of the current economic recession, and the need to balance the nation’s books. Yet he found $29million to give to private training establishments in the 2012 budget – that’s public money, our taxpayer dollars, going to private companies who will make a profit from students and their families. The Tertiary Education Commission notes: “This increases the funding rates for private training providers in line with the Government’s promise to treat them more equitably with public providers.” Why didn’t Stephen Joyce invest that $29.503 million into our regional polytechnics in order to continue the provision quality public education that meets the needs of all New Zealanders
2
whether they live in a major city or a small rural community? That seems fair and equitable to us.
2010 2011 2010‐2011 Audited Audited Difference
($m)
($m)
($m) Percentage
METROPOLITAN Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology
49.9
52
2.1
4.2%
Manukau Institute of Technology
62.6
57.8
‐4.8
‐7.7%
Otago Polytechnic
33.8
31.5
‐2.3
‐6.8%
Unitec New Zealand
79.1
79.2
0.1
0.1%
Waikato Institute of Technology
46.1
49.5
3.4
7.4%
Wellington Institute of Technology
33.6
32.3
‐1.3
‐3.9%
Whitireia Community Polytechnic
26.9
26.5
‐0.4
‐1.5%
TOTAL
332
328.8
‐3.2
‐1.0%
Aoraki Polytechnic
21.6
17.3
‐4.3
‐19.9%
Bay of Plenty Polytechnic Eastern Institute of Technology and Tairawhiti (merged) Nelson Marlborough Institute of Technology
27.9
25.9
‐2
‐7.2%
40.3
41
0.7
1.7%
25.7
22.6
‐3.1
‐12.1%
Northland Polytechnic
31.4
27.4
‐4
‐12.7%
Southern Institute of Technology
35.4
30.5
‐4.9
‐13.8%
Tai Poutini Polytechnic
21.1
17.8
‐3.3
‐15.6%
Universal College of Learning
35.9
31.5
‐4.4
‐12.3%
Waiariki Institute of Technology
30.6
25.9
‐4.7
‐15.4%
Western Institute of Technology Taranaki
17.7
15.4
‐13.0%
287.6
255.3
‐2.3 ‐ 32.3
‐11.2%
47
40.6
‐6.4
‐13.6%
REGIONAL
TOTAL
The Open Polytechnic of New Zealand
3
4