NZ Political Parties' ECE Policies

I know that this will interest some of you more than others, but I find it fascinating as an exploration of the different ranges of beliefs/policies that are available in different societies, so I am sharing it.

These are all of the major political parties in NZ, and their policies on Early Childhood Education, published in preparation for the election that was last weekend. National and Labour are the two biggest parties, with Green and Māori being the smaller but still significant ones.

You will (I think) notice that the baseline from which these parties are working is far different from the baseline in the United States. Not one party is debating whether public-funded, government-run ECE is something worth spending money on - it just depends how much. While I have done nothing to make this happen, and am simply here benefitting from it, I have discovered that I have a great deal of pride in this aspect of my adopted country. Unfortunately, I have also discovered that I don't think I should have to be proud to live in a country where children's welfare is looked after. That should be a given, and maybe someday I will see it as one, hopefully without losing my appreciation of it.

Note: I know that the text on the pictures is rather small, but if you click on the pictures, they'll get bigger so that you can read the text easily.

The National Party is the closest to the Republicans in the States (although still pretty liberal by US standards, which is part of my point).

The Labour Party is more like the Democrats in the States, if we remember that the whole spectrum is shifted in a very liberal direction.

Also, notice that while the Labour Party is trying to increase the 20 free hours to 25 free hours, the National Party is not advocating to decrease it. No major party is advocating taking away children's access to quality ECE at no cost to their families. 

It says, "Re-establish the target for 100% qualified staff" (first bullet point) because it was in effect for a while, but was deemed too difficult/expensive and reduced to 80%.

Yes, to be clear, that means that the current debate is whether 80% or 100% of people working with children under the age of five need to be professionally trained. I wish that that's what we were debating in the States, but... no.

Translations:

~ PAFT is Parents as First Teachers

~ HIPPY is Home Interaction Program for Parents and Youngsters

~ PAUSE and PAUA are both home-based care programs

~ kōhanga reo are Māori immersion centres

~ whānau led centres are family led centres

All of these programs are out there doing lots of good for children and families in the communities where I have worked. It is great to see so many good options.

The fourth bullet point, outlining the need for professional development for Te Whāriki is important because it is still a relatively new curriculum, and teachers need support in fully understanding and implementing it. (Again, I will devote an entire post to Te Whāriki sometime soon).

I'm not sure, but this party seems a bit wishy-washy on the 20 free hours idea (see the fifth bullet point). I wonder if they actually don't support it, but don't quite want to admit it? I'd say that is also a telling aspect of the political atmosphere, although I may be over-interpreting.

Mana is a Māori word meaning "prestige, authority, spiritual power, control, status, influence."

To end on a nice, positive note, notice the sense of humor in the blurb about the author.