What is the process, Craig?
cheery picked students
their smiling little faces
I can readily understand National Party people not liking list MPs. Their party is the least democratic of the three major parties where candidate selection and ranking are concerned.
Perhaps someone could give a quick succinct for dummies-like-me explanation of how it's done these days. I do recall that they had a major shakeup in the post-Muldoon era, where head office was able to overrule local branches' right to nominate what someone described as "the f*ckwit of their choice".
One of the triggers was the events surrounding the late unlamented Keith Allen, Winston's predecessor in Tauranga. Allen was rumoured to be terminally ill at the time, and Muldoon's reliance on a good ol' boy figure to give him the numbers in fending off the uppity Derek Quigley was seen by many as the pits of political cynicism.
Skool's out for summers...
Well, we all know the underclass need a stern guiding hand with plenty of stick and no carrot.
"Some charter schools perform better than their public counterparts, some don't," Miller said. "You can't change the fact that any school, no matter how it's funded, is ultimately just another type of building to contain these goddamn monsters for seven hours a day."
cheery picked students
their smiling little faces
Upturned in wonder at the marvel of correct spelling.
Perhaps someone could give a quick succinct for dummies-like-me explanation of how it's done these days
It's the very opposite of a succinct explanation, but there's an MA thesis out of VUW specifically on changes to National Party selection processes as a result of MMP: http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10063/302/thesis.pdf?sequence=2
the marvel of correct spelling
bloody charter schools for you
party HQ gets to pull 5 people out of its arse
> Foofy tosh.
Indeed: You’d be hard pressed to find as many as five National candidates who would openly admit to ever being pulled out of anyone’s arse.
Such a claim should be withdrawn forthwith!
I think Keith Allen would have made an excellent MP for Tauranga:
Cheers for that link NBH, you're a real goldmine. That study is only up to 2005, though. If nothing's changed since then, it's a pretty undemocratic process all right. A "Candidates Club" (yes, they do actually call it that) is formed, from which people can be arbitrarily excluded. These people are then trained into their candidacy, and the most promising ones selected by a small board formed from the current party leadership. The names of the people in the Candidates Club were kept secret.
I can't see how anyone would doubt that they have an open and transparent process that involves the members of the party in selecting candidates. Why, they're so open that they even involve members of ACT in their candidate selections.
What is the process, Craig?
Well, I've never had a phone call from Party HQ telling me how to vote in any selection I've been party to. You're going to have to take my word on that, because I'm not going to decide to break confidentiality I agreed to respect at the time.
How does crony capitalism makes money out of charter schools? Some snake oil son-of-a-bitch friend of the National party will suddenly discover an interest in education and set up a corporation to run a charter school in South Auckland.
Sounds like a business plan. For PR purposes, I'd suggest they also employ a professional education consultant to come up with some vague and visionary new approach to education that the stuffy state schools are too old-fashioned and union-bound to understand. It should involve iPads.
You're going to have to take my word on that, because I'm not going to decide to break confidentiality I agreed to respect at the time.
Your word is fine. But I was asking you about the process by which candidates are currently selected. That's not a sworn secret now, is it? Can you shed some light?
It has just dawned on me looking at the patchwork quilt that is the pavement leading to my workplace that Govt. continually sells our assets to fund whatever.
It would be quite good if they simply made the ones that we have work. But then it also dawned on me, that's not what it's all about, and candidate selection is fundamental to this. That is the first point at which we the voters are excluded from our democracy, the rest is as they say, a cakewalk.
Cheers for that link NBH, you're a real goldmine
I'm blushing! :-)
It is a great link, cheers.
Thank Mr Stephens, his supervisors, and the VUW Pols department - not me. :-)
It should involve iPads.
*sigh* And fish-oil pills, and Brain Gym, and Mozart, and all those other fads based on no solid evidential base.
A "Candidates Club" (yes, they do actually call it that) is formed, from which people can be arbitrarily excluded. These people are then trained into their candidacy, and the most promising ones selected by a small board formed from the current party leadership. The names of the people in the Candidates Club were kept secret.
Oh, for God's sake Ben... keep reading.
However, the Board’s selection control is by no means perfect and National’s electorate candidate selection remains more decentralised than Labour’s selection process which has substantial central representation on the selectorate.
Sorry to fuck with the meme here, but the candidate selection process in National doesn't exist to rubber stamp the Board's annointed. Really. And after the unholy fucking mess that was the 2002 campaign, National saw an urgent need to revert to some kind of Electioneering 101 (you know, like being able to turn up at a cottage meeting and not say "Sorry, I don't know what our policy on X. is" - true story) for potential candidates? No shit, Sherlock.
Dude, just tell us what the process actually is. You're being slippery.
I'd suggest they also employ a professional education consultant to come up with some vague and visionary new approach to education that the stuffy state schools are too old-fashioned and union-bound to understand. It should involve iPads.
Seems to be the standard gold rush model. Doesn't matter how you did at school, you still get issued with an iPad when you board the EQC gravy train.
I heard someone today describe National foisting charter schools on Christchurch as "hitting them when they're down and wont fight back"
Re schools, I ask again, what (in easy simple to understand words please) is broken?
I'm calling Mr Banks, Mr.1.1% from now on, just sayin'
Re schools, I ask again,
what … is broken?
I find it a bit disturbing that, for a concept that has been foisted on us all just this week, Banks already has unnamed groups ready to go...
Banks said yesterday that Christchurch was chosen as a trial area because of the opportunities that had arisen from the earthquakes.
He refused to name the groups that wanted to set up charter schools in the city, but hoped business interests in the building industry would work closely with a charter school to bring workplace education into the classroom.
Banks said he envisaged building and construction companies co-funding charter schools, which would focus on getting pupils into the work force.
"This will give opportunities for education to become very relevant to people like myself who were not interested in school work," Banks said.
from today’s Press
Christchurch Boys High seems quite keen to sell off their pupils to corporate interests as well:
Christchurch Boys’ High School principal Trevor McIntyre said he could see no harm in trialling charter schools.
There had often been a huge rift between business and schools, and the initiative could help bridge that gap, he said.
“If there’s a corporation out there that would like to invest in education, then let’s have a piece of it,” he said.
perhaps Mr Banks could leave Chchch alone and try his experiment on Kings College in Auckland…
…and what’s with the Herald’s editorial stance? The final paragraph seems rather aggressive!
Indeed, a great deal of good may come from it. Perhaps that is the teacher unions’ greatest fear.
When did teacher / teacher-union bashing become a national sport…?