Discussion:
DON BRASH is a lying bastard!
(too old to reply)
Pulp Fixxion
2004-02-26 21:08:17 UTC
Permalink
Brash must put up or apologise for university slur

The government is continuing to demand that National Party leader Don
Brash apologise for falsely claiming universities are lowering their
standards to let Maori students graduate.

Associate Education (Tertiary Education) Minister Steve Maharey wrote
to Dr Brash this morning repeating his demand that he apologise for
the comments made on One News last Thursday. The comments were
repeated by National's colonial affairs spokesperson Gerry Brownlee on
20/20 last night. New Zealand's universities and the key professional
associations have since confirmed in writing that, contrary to Dr
Brash's claims, the standards for graduation and entry to professional
associations have never been lowered for Maori or any other group.

Steve Maharey said Dr Brash must now put up the evidence for the
claims, or unreservedly apologise for them.

"Dr Brash's comments were disgraceful because they were not only
inaccurate, they also called into question the professionalism of
Maori doctors, lawyers and other professional who New Zealanders put
their trust into every day.

"The nation's universities, the Institute of Professional Engineers,
the Nursing Council, the Medical Council and the Dental Council have
all confirmed that Dr Brash's claims are wrong.

"I am publicly releasing the letter I have sent to Dr Brash today
because his comments cannot be allowed to stand. It's not good enough
to continue misleading New Zealanders as he has been doing for the
last two weeks. He must apologise and he must pull his spokesperson
into line," Steve Maharey said.

wwww.beehive.govt.nz/maharey
Berend de Boer
2004-02-26 21:22:14 UTC
Permalink
Pulp> Brash must put up or apologise for university slur The
Pulp> government is continuing to demand that National Party
Pulp> leader Don Brash apologise for falsely claiming universities
Pulp> are lowering their standards to let Maori students graduate.

It was even confirmed by Steve Maharey himself when he assumed that
Bill English's wife got admitted to medical school because she was
Samoan. He just automatically assumed that.

He didn't even give it a shred of a thought that it might be because
of her marks.

The sicko,

Berend. (-:
R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
2004-02-26 21:55:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Berend de Boer
Pulp> Brash must put up or apologise for university slur The
Pulp> government is continuing to demand that National Party
Pulp> leader Don Brash apologise for falsely claiming universities
Pulp> are lowering their standards to let Maori students graduate.
It was even confirmed by Steve Maharey himself when he assumed that
Bill English's wife got admitted to medical school because she was
Samoan. He just automatically assumed that.
He didn't even give it a shred of a thought that it might be because
of her marks.
Now you're confusing lowered standards of entry with lowered passing
grades. It is not disputed (AFAIK) that Maori and PI candidates are
allowed entry to courses on lower qualifications than their non-Maori
and non-PI counterparts in some cases, but there is also some
suggestion that Maori and PI students may be passed through courses on
a lower level of a achievement than their non-brown counterparts. That
is what is in question here.

Until a couple of days ago, I was of the unchallenged belief that the
latter did not happen. However someone recently reported that an
acquaintance of theirs had experience of this happening. Now, given
that this forum is hardly a reliable source of information, I'm not
jumping to any conclusions, but it does bring the issue into question.
--
R.G. "Stumpy" Marsh Timaru, New Zealand
<http://marsh.orcon.net.nz/>
Berend de Boer
2004-02-27 01:47:36 UTC
Permalink
R> Now you're confusing lowered standards of entry with lowered
R> passing grades.

I was well aware of the distinction, I was just pointing to the kind
of reasoning that will develop if you make a distinction based on
race.
--
Regards,

Berend. (-:
Simon Pleasants
2004-02-27 10:53:33 UTC
Permalink
"R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh"
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
It is not disputed (AFAIK) that Maori and PI candidates are
allowed entry to courses on lower qualifications than their non-Maori
and non-PI counterparts in some cases, but there is also some
suggestion that Maori and PI students may be passed through courses on
a lower level of a achievement than their non-brown counterparts.
But New Zealand's eight universities, through the New Zealand
Vice-Chancellor's Committee, have confirmed in writing that standards of
assessment are the same for all students, irrespective of their ethnicity.

- Otago deputy vice-chancellor (academic) Dr Phil Meade: "The
university does not have a policy of allowing any group of students to pass
courses at a lower level of achievement." (ODT 21/2/04)

- Association of University Staff National president Dr Bill
Rosenberg said there was absolutely no evidence to support Dr Brash's claim
standards for degree programmes varied according to race. (ODT 21/2/04)

- Stuart McCutcheon of Victoria University has said: "Special
support is not unique to Maori and Pacific students. It is provided for
international students, students with disabilities, and mature students."


Meantime when asked if he would abolish all government Maori scholarships
Brash said: "I'd like to think about that. I'd like to consider the case
fully. All I'm saying at the moment is there are serious dangers in
this...." SSTimes 22/2/04
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
That is what is in question here.
Until a couple of days ago, I was of the unchallenged belief that the
latter did not happen. However someone recently reported that an
acquaintance of theirs had experience of this happening.
Do you realise how shonky that sounds? "A friend of a friend says he spoke
to a chip shop owner on holiday in Bournemouth who swears it was true" Duh.
Sucker.
R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
2004-02-28 10:20:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Pleasants
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Until a couple of days ago, I was of the unchallenged belief that the
latter did not happen. However someone recently reported that an
acquaintance of theirs had experience of this happening.
Do you realise how shonky that sounds? "A friend of a friend says he spoke
to a chip shop owner on holiday in Bournemouth who swears it was true" Duh.
Sucker.
Who's the bigger sucker? The guy who waits for as much evidence as
possible before giving someone the benefit of the doubt, or the guy
who resolutely sticks his head in the sand and refuses to entertain
the possibility they've done something wrong?

Like I said, I'm not jumping to any conclusions. It's a single dubious
outlying data point, but it's a data point none-the-less. The fact
that the VCC deny that it happens is somewhat reassuring. At least is
suggests that if it happens, it happens against policy. But still,
policy or not, it wouldn't entirely surprise me to find that some
lecturer somewhere was marking softer on Maori than other students.

In the jury-room of my head the verdict is for acquittal on this
particular charge of institutional racism, but at 11-1 the jury's
still out on the lesser charge of ad hoc racism.
--
R.G. "Stumpy" Marsh Timaru, New Zealand
<http://marsh.orcon.net.nz/>
Simon Pleasants
2004-02-28 23:11:41 UTC
Permalink
"R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh"
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Like I said, I'm not jumping to any conclusions. It's a single dubious
outlying data point, but it's a data point none-the-less. The fact
that the VCC deny that it happens is somewhat reassuring. At least is
suggests that if it happens, it happens against policy. But still,
policy or not, it wouldn't entirely surprise me to find that some
lecturer somewhere was marking softer on Maori than other students.
But Stumpy, you seem to be blaming the gummint for somethig that you suppose
a single academic might possibly have done.

You're giving this particular argumentative position far more credence than
it deserves.
R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
2004-02-29 03:01:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Pleasants
"R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh"
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Like I said, I'm not jumping to any conclusions. It's a single dubious
outlying data point, but it's a data point none-the-less. The fact
that the VCC deny that it happens is somewhat reassuring. At least is
suggests that if it happens, it happens against policy. But still,
policy or not, it wouldn't entirely surprise me to find that some
lecturer somewhere was marking softer on Maori than other students.
But Stumpy, you seem to be blaming the gummint for somethig that you suppose
a single academic might possibly have done.
When have I ever done that? I'm disturbed by the possibility that such
a "culture" could exist within universities - and certainly there is
ample evidence that a culture exists in which it is not unthinkable
that it *could* happen, whether it does or not - regardless of whether
the government is directly responsible.
Post by Simon Pleasants
You're giving this particular argumentative position far more credence than
it deserves.
You're reading more into what I say than is justified. My position is
no more than that *IF* Maori are being allowed to graduate on lower
levels of achievement than non-Maori, then that is a "Bad Thing" and
that it is not possible on the basis of available evidence to be sure
beyond a reasonable doubt that it does not occur. (And yes, I know
that the standard for conviction in a court of law is the reverse...
but this is politics.)

Again, I'm not jumping to any conclusions. Why are you so hot under
the collar about this?
--
R.G. "Stumpy" Marsh Timaru, New Zealand
<http://marsh.orcon.net.nz/>
Brian Harmer
2004-02-29 04:11:49 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 16:01:10 +1300, R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
When have I ever done that? I'm disturbed by the possibility that such
a "culture" could exist within universities - and certainly there is
ample evidence that a culture exists in which it is not unthinkable
that it *could* happen, whether it does or not - regardless of whether
the government is directly responsible.
I am sorry, but I have seen no evidence (let alone ample evidence)
that a culture of allowing people to pass with lower standards
actually exists.
R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
2004-02-29 05:06:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 16:01:10 +1300, R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
When have I ever done that? I'm disturbed by the possibility that such
a "culture" could exist within universities - and certainly there is
ample evidence that a culture exists in which it is not unthinkable
that it *could* happen, whether it does or not - regardless of whether
the government is directly responsible.
I am sorry, but I have seen no evidence (let alone ample evidence)
that a culture of allowing people to pass with lower standards
actually exists.
There is a culture of PC worship of tangata- and tikanga-Maori in many
universities. It inappropriately invades many aspects of university
education. The only question is whether it extends as far as being
soft on them as far as passing grades is concerned.
--
R.G. "Stumpy" Marsh Timaru, New Zealand
<http://marsh.orcon.net.nz/>
Brian Harmer
2004-02-29 07:14:12 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 18:06:53 +1300, R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by Brian Harmer
I am sorry, but I have seen no evidence (let alone ample evidence)
that a culture of allowing people to pass with lower standards
actually exists.
There is a culture of PC worship of tangata- and tikanga-Maori in many
universities. It inappropriately invades many aspects of university
education. The only question is whether it extends as far as being
soft on them as far as passing grades is concerned.
That is a straw man of immense proportions. Your first assertion is a
huge over-generalisation. I believe I have answered the last question
to the best of my ability in other posts.
R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
2004-02-29 10:24:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 18:06:53 +1300, R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
There is a culture of PC worship of tangata- and tikanga-Maori in many
universities. It inappropriately invades many aspects of university
education. The only question is whether it extends as far as being
soft on them as far as passing grades is concerned.
That is a straw man of immense proportions. Your first assertion is a
huge over-generalisation.
Oh, I don't mean to suggest that it's universal, even within
individual institutions, across institutions within individual subject
areas, or even that every institution suffers from it at all,
necessarily (although I suspect the latter may well be the case). I
think it's undeniable though, that there is widespread pro-Maori
political correctness in NZ tertiary institutions. I've experienced
various forms of it myself in various institutions.
Post by Brian Harmer
I believe I have answered the last question
to the best of my ability in other posts.
Indeed. Thanks.
--
R.G. "Stumpy" Marsh Timaru, New Zealand
<http://marsh.orcon.net.nz/>
Simon Pleasants
2004-02-29 09:47:50 UTC
Permalink
"R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh"
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by Simon Pleasants
But Stumpy, you seem to be blaming the gummint for somethig that you suppose
a single academic might possibly have done.
When have I ever done that? I'm disturbed by the possibility that such
a "culture" could exist within universities - and certainly there is
ample evidence that a culture exists in which it is not unthinkable
that it *could* happen, whether it does or not - regardless of whether
the government is directly responsible.
Blah blah blah ... stumpy, you're getting all huffy and puffy again about
something for which you admit there is no real evidence.
R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
2004-02-29 10:44:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Pleasants
"R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh"
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by Simon Pleasants
But Stumpy, you seem to be blaming the gummint for somethig that you
suppose
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by Simon Pleasants
a single academic might possibly have done.
When have I ever done that? I'm disturbed by the possibility that such
a "culture" could exist within universities - and certainly there is
ample evidence that a culture exists in which it is not unthinkable
that it *could* happen, whether it does or not - regardless of whether
the government is directly responsible.
Blah blah blah ... stumpy, you're getting all huffy and puffy again about
something for which you admit there is no real evidence.
I'm not getting huffy about anything. I'm just exploring the issue.
You're the one making a song and dance about it. Methinks thou dost
protest too much. Guilty conscience?
--
R.G. "Stumpy" Marsh Timaru, New Zealand
<http://marsh.orcon.net.nz/>
Mainlander
2004-02-28 11:46:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Pleasants
"R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh"
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
It is not disputed (AFAIK) that Maori and PI candidates are
allowed entry to courses on lower qualifications than their non-Maori
and non-PI counterparts in some cases, but there is also some
suggestion that Maori and PI students may be passed through courses on
a lower level of a achievement than their non-brown counterparts.
But New Zealand's eight universities, through the New Zealand
Vice-Chancellor's Committee, have confirmed in writing that standards of
assessment are the same for all students, irrespective of their ethnicity.
- Otago deputy vice-chancellor (academic) Dr Phil Meade: "The
university does not have a policy of allowing any group of students to pass
courses at a lower level of achievement." (ODT 21/2/04)
- Association of University Staff National president Dr Bill
Rosenberg said there was absolutely no evidence to support Dr Brash's claim
standards for degree programmes varied according to race. (ODT 21/2/04)
There certainly is evidence that the AUS head is an Alliance supporter
Simon Pleasants
2004-02-28 23:12:35 UTC
Permalink
"Mainlander"
Post by Mainlander
Post by Simon Pleasants
Association of University Staff National president Dr Bill
Rosenberg said there was absolutely no evidence to support Dr Brash's claim
standards for degree programmes varied according to race. (ODT 21/2/04)
There certainly is evidence that the AUS head is an Alliance supporter
So what? Straw man.
Mainlander
2004-02-29 06:03:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Pleasants
"Mainlander"
Post by Mainlander
Post by Simon Pleasants
Association of University Staff National president Dr Bill
Rosenberg said there was absolutely no evidence to support Dr Brash's
claim
Post by Mainlander
Post by Simon Pleasants
standards for degree programmes varied according to race. (ODT 21/2/04)
There certainly is evidence that the AUS head is an Alliance supporter
So what? Straw man.
Clear indication of bias and compulsive need to attack a National party
spokesperson
xlo
2004-02-26 22:23:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Berend de Boer
Pulp> Brash must put up or apologise for university slur The
Pulp> government is continuing to demand that National Party
Pulp> leader Don Brash apologise for falsely claiming universities
Pulp> are lowering their standards to let Maori students graduate.
It was even confirmed by Steve Maharey himself when he assumed that
Bill English's wife got admitted to medical school because she was
Samoan. He just automatically assumed that.
Berend the bore cannot see the difference between:

One allegation about lower *entry* standards.
Another allegation about lower *assessment* standards.
Eeyan
2004-02-26 23:13:41 UTC
Permalink
NZ isn't racist!! (Yeah Right!!!)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wakeup_nz/
Post by xlo
Post by Berend de Boer
Pulp> Brash must put up or apologise for university slur The
Pulp> government is continuing to demand that National Party
Pulp> leader Don Brash apologise for falsely claiming universities
Pulp> are lowering their standards to let Maori students graduate.
It was even confirmed by Steve Maharey himself when he assumed that
Bill English's wife got admitted to medical school because she was
Samoan. He just automatically assumed that.
One allegation about lower *entry* standards.
Another allegation about lower *assessment* standards.
I am aware that in the case of overseas students where english is their
second language the marking is not so strict - the students put ESL on the
paper. So if it is done for some it is entirely possible it is done for
others.........
xlo
2004-02-27 00:01:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eeyan
NZ isn't racist!! (Yeah Right!!!)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wakeup_nz/
Post by xlo
Post by Berend de Boer
Pulp> Brash must put up or apologise for university slur The
Pulp> government is continuing to demand that National Party
Pulp> leader Don Brash apologise for falsely claiming universities
Pulp> are lowering their standards to let Maori students graduate.
It was even confirmed by Steve Maharey himself when he assumed that
Bill English's wife got admitted to medical school because she was
Samoan. He just automatically assumed that.
One allegation about lower *entry* standards.
Another allegation about lower *assessment* standards.
I am aware that in the case of overseas students where english is their
second language the marking is not so strict - the students put ESL on the
paper. So if it is done for some it is entirely possible it is done for
others.........
I am not aware of any such scheme - please enlighten me.
Candice
2004-02-27 00:17:28 UTC
Permalink
His claim isn't at all false

Fact: At AUT Maori students may take Te Reo papers which can count towards
degree and diploma programmes.

Te Reo papers are now free - and out of general interest I have taken a
couple - and I can honestly say that the work effort and pass requirements
were FAR less of normal papers I have taken.
xlo
2004-02-27 00:56:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Candice
His claim isn't at all false
Well, it certainly isn't made any more true by your contribution.
Post by Candice
Fact: At AUT Maori students may take Te Reo papers which can count towards
degree and diploma programmes.
Fair enough. Maori is an official language in this country, and it is great
that there are some courses available taught in that language.

BUT - Teo Reo is NOT ESL.
Do the Te Reo courses offer lower assessment standards for students who cannot
speak maori well?
Post by Candice
Te Reo papers are now free - and out of general interest I have taken a
couple - and I can honestly say that the work effort and pass requirements
were FAR less of normal papers I have taken.
There are lots of free courses available in various subjects at polytechs around
the country.
If the papers were the same - apart from the language - then I do not believe
your claim that the pass requirements were far lower. Prove me wrong. If the
papers were not the same, then so what? It is quite likely that you will find
some papers much harder than others in any study that you do.
Candice
2004-02-27 03:37:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by xlo
Post by Candice
His claim isn't at all false
Well, it certainly isn't made any more true by your contribution.
Post by Candice
Fact: At AUT Maori students may take Te Reo papers which can count towards
degree and diploma programmes.
Fair enough. Maori is an official language in this country, and it is great
that there are some courses available taught in that language.
Research exactly what Te Reo is. I don't speak any maori at all, and
successfully passed two Te Reo papers. Te Reo is about maori, their
development and issues - not solely maori language.
xlo
2004-02-27 04:56:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Candice
Post by xlo
Post by Candice
His claim isn't at all false
Well, it certainly isn't made any more true by your contribution.
Post by Candice
Fact: At AUT Maori students may take Te Reo papers which can count
towards
Post by xlo
Post by Candice
degree and diploma programmes.
Fair enough. Maori is an official language in this country, and it is
great
Post by xlo
that there are some courses available taught in that language.
Research exactly what Te Reo is. I don't speak any maori at all, and
successfully passed two Te Reo papers. Te Reo is about maori, their
development and issues - not solely maori language.
Translation = the language. That is what it means. Quite simple.
If you study any language over the past few decades you are also likely to study
other cultural aspects of the language. I am surprised if a Te Reo class did
not have language as a primary focus.

Did you enjoy it? Why?

BTW, because you found this course "easy", does not mean that lower standards
are applied. I would probably find it quite hard - although I may well find
other subjects that you may consider hard quite easy.
Candice
2004-02-27 11:08:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by xlo
Did you enjoy it? Why?
It was rather interesting. But I fail to see how it could be of use towards
a diploma in business.
Post by xlo
BTW, because you found this course "easy", does not mean that lower standards
are applied. I would probably find it quite hard - although I may well find
other subjects that you may consider hard quite easy.
Although I passed the papers, I referred to them as a far less work effort -
rather then easy. E.g. - I didn't even have to sit any exams.
R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
2004-02-28 11:23:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Candice
Although I passed the papers, I referred to them as a far less work effort -
rather then easy. E.g. - I didn't even have to sit any exams.
That's not entirely surprising for a language paper. Internal
assessment would be appropriate for a "paper" which was mostly
concerned with spoken language.

The fact that there were no exams is not, on its own, enough to
justify a charge that it required less effort to pass - less focussed
effort perhaps, but if the achievement requirements were similar, the
method of assessment itself is largely irrelevant.

I'd also make the point that courses in general do have differing
levels of effort and difficulty for various people, and even on
average. The fact that a Te Reo course is itself easier to pass than
other courses is not evidence of institutional racism in terms of the
passability of qualifications, provided the course is available to all
students.

In your OP you seem to imply that (at some stage at least) these
courses are (or were) available only to Maori students. That in itself
would be a form of institutional racism, whether assessment standards
were compromised or not.
--
R.G. "Stumpy" Marsh Timaru, New Zealand
<http://marsh.orcon.net.nz/>
Trevor
2004-02-27 04:53:09 UTC
Permalink
So he is a liar as well as a racist!
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Brash must put up or apologise for university slur
The government is continuing to demand that National Party leader Don
Brash apologise for falsely claiming universities are lowering their
standards to let Maori students graduate.
to Dr Brash this morning repeating his demand that he apologise for
the comments made on One News last Thursday. The comments were
repeated by National's colonial affairs spokesperson Gerry Brownlee on
20/20 last night. New Zealand's universities and the key professional
associations have since confirmed in writing that, contrary to Dr
Brash's claims, the standards for graduation and entry to professional
associations have never been lowered for Maori or any other group.
Steve Maharey said Dr Brash must now put up the evidence for the
claims, or unreservedly apologise for them.
"Dr Brash's comments were disgraceful because they were not only
inaccurate, they also called into question the professionalism of
Maori doctors, lawyers and other professional who New Zealanders put
their trust into every day.
"The nation's universities, the Institute of Professional Engineers,
the Nursing Council, the Medical Council and the Dental Council have
all confirmed that Dr Brash's claims are wrong.
"I am publicly releasing the letter I have sent to Dr Brash today
because his comments cannot be allowed to stand. It's not good enough
to continue misleading New Zealanders as he has been doing for the
last two weeks. He must apologise and he must pull his spokesperson
into line," Steve Maharey said.
wwww.beehive.govt.nz/maharey
Brian Dooley
2004-02-27 08:43:47 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:53:09 +1300, "Trevor"
Post by Trevor
So he is a liar as well as a racist!
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Brash must put up or apologise for university slur
The government is continuing to demand that National Party leader Don
Brash apologise for falsely claiming universities are lowering their
standards to let Maori students graduate.
to Dr Brash this morning repeating his demand that he apologise for
the comments made on One News last Thursday. The comments were
repeated by National's colonial affairs spokesperson Gerry Brownlee on
20/20 last night. New Zealand's universities and the key professional
associations have since confirmed in writing that, contrary to Dr
Brash's claims, the standards for graduation and entry to professional
associations have never been lowered for Maori or any other group.
Steve Maharey said Dr Brash must now put up the evidence for the
claims, or unreservedly apologise for them.
"Dr Brash's comments were disgraceful because they were not only
inaccurate, they also called into question the professionalism of
Maori doctors, lawyers and other professional who New Zealanders put
their trust into every day.
"The nation's universities, the Institute of Professional Engineers,
the Nursing Council, the Medical Council and the Dental Council have
all confirmed that Dr Brash's claims are wrong.
As reported in the DomPost today.
Post by Trevor
Post by Pulp Fixxion
"I am publicly releasing the letter I have sent to Dr Brash today
because his comments cannot be allowed to stand. It's not good enough
to continue misleading New Zealanders as he has been doing for the
last two weeks. He must apologise and he must pull his spokesperson
into line," Steve Maharey said.
wwww.beehive.govt.nz/maharey
--
Brian Dooley

Wellington New Zealand
George.com
2004-02-27 08:32:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Brash must put up or apologise for university slur
The government is continuing to demand that National Party leader Don
Brash apologise for falsely claiming universities are lowering their
standards to let Maori students graduate.
to Dr Brash this morning repeating his demand that he apologise for
the comments made on One News last Thursday. The comments were
repeated by National's colonial affairs spokesperson Gerry Brownlee on
20/20 last night. New Zealand's universities and the key professional
associations have since confirmed in writing that, contrary to Dr
Brash's claims, the standards for graduation and entry to professional
associations have never been lowered for Maori or any other group.
Steve Maharey said Dr Brash must now put up the evidence for the
claims, or unreservedly apologise for them.
"Dr Brash's comments were disgraceful because they were not only
inaccurate, they also called into question the professionalism of
Maori doctors, lawyers and other professional who New Zealanders put
their trust into every day.
"The nation's universities, the Institute of Professional Engineers,
the Nursing Council, the Medical Council and the Dental Council have
all confirmed that Dr Brash's claims are wrong.
"I am publicly releasing the letter I have sent to Dr Brash today
because his comments cannot be allowed to stand. It's not good enough
to continue misleading New Zealanders as he has been doing for the
last two weeks. He must apologise and he must pull his spokesperson
into line," Steve Maharey said.
Hmmm, yes, we have been waiting a rather loooong time for Dr Brash to front
up with some good hard evidence to back up his list of claims. Already some
of the examples surrounding his claims have been proven distorted or
exaggerated.

rob

I wonder if we will get Brash's evidence first or whether it will stop
raining first? Both seem unlikely at this stage.
Peter
2004-02-27 08:59:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pulp Fixxion
to Dr Brash this morning repeating his demand that he apologise for
the comments made on One News last Thursday.
Steve Maharey is away with the fairies. Since when did a Labour
member apologise to a National member (except to avoid ejection)?

Why should this time be different?

Steve can keep huffing and puffing as much as he likes.
Brian Harmer
2004-02-27 09:26:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter
Post by Pulp Fixxion
to Dr Brash this morning repeating his demand that he apologise for
the comments made on One News last Thursday.
Steve Maharey is away with the fairies. Since when did a Labour
member apologise to a National member (except to avoid ejection)?
The apology sought is not to Maharey, but to the institutions Dr Brash
has misled the public about.
Post by Peter
Why should this time be different?
See above.
Peter
2004-02-27 09:44:42 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:26:02 +1300, Brian Harmer
Post by Brian Harmer
The apology sought is not to Maharey, but to the institutions Dr Brash
has misled the public about.
Post by Peter
Why should this time be different?
The institutions are quite capable of seeking their own apologies or
accepting that the hat fits. There is nothing Steve can do that will
help them. I do not know why Steve wasnts to help the Universities at
present when he plans to sack the Chancellors and Councils and appoint
his own shills instead.

Anyway this now definitely shows that Steve Maharey is just into
political grandstanding.

Labour is caught like an opossum in glaring headlights and is doing
anything to wriggle out of the web of its own making.
Brian Harmer
2004-02-27 09:51:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:26:02 +1300, Brian Harmer
Post by Brian Harmer
The apology sought is not to Maharey, but to the institutions Dr Brash
has misled the public about.
Post by Peter
Why should this time be different?
The institutions are quite capable of seeking their own apologies or
accepting that the hat fits.
Maharey is the minister in charge of those institutions. Nevertheless
the institutions have asked for an apology for the lie. The silence
that has followed is deafening.
Post by Peter
There is nothing Steve can do that will
help them. I do not know why Steve wasnts to help the Universities at
present when he plans to sack the Chancellors and Councils and appoint
his own shills instead.
He is the minister
Post by Peter
Anyway this now definitely shows that Steve Maharey is just into
political grandstanding.
Whatever.
Post by Peter
Labour is caught like an opossum in glaring headlights and is doing
anything to wriggle out of the web of its own making.
You are letting your dislike become pathological.
Daniel Silva
2004-02-27 10:20:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by Peter
The institutions are quite capable of seeking their own apologies or
accepting that the hat fits.
Maharey is the minister in charge of those institutions. Nevertheless
the institutions have asked for an apology for the lie. The silence
that has followed is deafening.
Next you will be starting threads with "BRASH LIED!!!" The Stephenisation of
Brian Harmer.
Brian Harmer
2004-02-27 18:23:35 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:20:40 +1300, "Daniel Silva"
Post by Daniel Silva
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by Peter
The institutions are quite capable of seeking their own apologies or
accepting that the hat fits.
Maharey is the minister in charge of those institutions. Nevertheless
the institutions have asked for an apology for the lie. The silence
that has followed is deafening.
Next you will be starting threads with "BRASH LIED!!!" The Stephenisation of
Brian Harmer.
Oh come now, Daniel! Sneering at the poster is no substitute for
refuting the point.

I have been assured by many including some who have worked with the
man, that Dr Brash is a man of immense personal integrity. In this
case he has misled the public, possibly because like me, he was under
the mistaken impression that affirmative action in education meant
lower graduating standards. Now that the error has been pointed out to
him, he owes it to the public, to the people he maligned by these
assertions, and to his own reputation, to acknowledge that on that
topic at least, he was wrong.
Daniel Silva
2004-02-27 19:15:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:20:40 +1300, "Daniel Silva"
Post by Daniel Silva
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by Peter
The institutions are quite capable of seeking their own apologies or
accepting that the hat fits.
Maharey is the minister in charge of those institutions. Nevertheless
the institutions have asked for an apology for the lie. The silence
that has followed is deafening.
Next you will be starting threads with "BRASH LIED!!!" The Stephenisation of
Brian Harmer.
Oh come now, Daniel! Sneering at the poster is no substitute for
refuting the point.
Sorry you took it as sneering. The jibe was meant to do the same job as a
temperature gauge.
Post by Brian Harmer
I have been assured by many including some who have worked with the
man, that Dr Brash is a man of immense personal integrity. In this
case he has misled the public, possibly because like me, he was under
the mistaken impression that affirmative action in education meant
lower graduating standards. Now that the error has been pointed out to
him, he owes it to the public, to the people he maligned by these
assertions, and to his own reputation, to acknowledge that on that
topic at least, he was wrong.
Indeed. However, those "pointing out the error" are far from impartial in
this debate. I would take any pronouncement on this topic from university
administration bureaucrats with a ton of salt. Their self-serving assurances
are not conclusive for me, at this stage. If, however, it turns out that
race-based affirmative action is not really affirmative action, then I would
agree with you that an apology is due.
Mr Scebe
2004-02-27 19:55:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daniel Silva
Indeed. However, those "pointing out the error" are far from impartial in
this debate. I would take any pronouncement on this topic from university
administration bureaucrats with a ton of salt. Their self-serving assurances
are not conclusive for me, at this stage. If, however, it turns out that
race-based affirmative action is not really affirmative action, then I would
agree with you that an apology is due.
Yes, very interesting. Love interest worked at a University (she is
Australian, with no preconceived cultural bias). After a year or so, her
attitude to Maori had changed irrevocably when she saw how they were
constantly treated with "kid gloves" and everything they did was beyond
reproach. Including at least one act of theft as a servant that was
completely ignored.

I really don't think that the Association of University staff have *any*
impartiality in this matter, and given the acts of their alumni in lying,
anything they say should be taken with a grain of salt.

--
Mr Scebe
Losers always whine about their 'best'.
Winners go home and fuck the prom queen".
~Sean Connery in "The Rock"
Brian Harmer
2004-02-28 05:00:45 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 08:15:32 +1300, "Daniel Silva"
Post by Daniel Silva
Indeed. However, those "pointing out the error" are far from impartial in
this debate. I would take any pronouncement on this topic from university
administration bureaucrats with a ton of salt. Their self-serving assurances
are not conclusive for me, at this stage. If, however, it turns out that
race-based affirmative action is not really affirmative action, then I would
agree with you that an apology is due.
Just as any accused pleading not guilty is not impartial. The vice
chancellors may be bureaucrats, but they are defending the reputation
of the people who make up the institutions.
As a non-bureacrat, and a mere humble academic setting exams and
marking papers and theses etc., allow me to assure you that no
mechanism exists in my institution, for special treatment in passing
any class of candidate. Whether or not the entry criteria were
lowered, the grading criteria are absolutely uniform. If they passed,
they did so on the basis of work submitted.
Daniel Silva
2004-02-28 05:23:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 08:15:32 +1300, "Daniel Silva"
Post by Daniel Silva
Indeed. However, those "pointing out the error" are far from impartial in
this debate. I would take any pronouncement on this topic from university
administration bureaucrats with a ton of salt. Their self-serving assurances
are not conclusive for me, at this stage. If, however, it turns out that
race-based affirmative action is not really affirmative action, then I would
agree with you that an apology is due.
Just as any accused pleading not guilty is not impartial. The vice
chancellors may be bureaucrats, but they are defending the reputation
of the people who make up the institutions.
Of course they are. That is the point. We can't rely on their self-serving
assertions as a basis to demand apologies, as you have done.
Post by Brian Harmer
As a non-bureacrat, and a mere humble academic setting exams and
marking papers and theses etc., allow me to assure you that no
mechanism exists in my institution, for special treatment in passing
any class of candidate. Whether or not the entry criteria were
lowered, the grading criteria are absolutely uniform. If they passed,
they did so on the basis of work submitted.
Assurance accepted. The distinction between admission and grading is but an
artful diversion from the main point of contention. Candidates are admitted
with grades lower than others, who end up being excluded solely because of
their race.
Barry Phease
2004-02-28 06:43:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daniel Silva
Assurance accepted. The distinction between admission and grading is but an
artful diversion from the main point of contention. Candidates are admitted
with grades lower than others, who end up being excluded solely because of
their race.
OK so we agree that Brash almost certainly lied about the assessment
question. Perhaps he is too thick to understand the difference between
admission and assessment.

Let us examine your statement about admission. You say that someone is
excluded solely because of their race. This is plain wrong. That person
could have got in if they had achieved higher entry grades, so they were
excluded on the basis of several factors - one of which was race. The
people who admit students to restricted courses like medicine have to look
at several criteria, of which acaemic performance is ONE important part.
If someone has a personality disorder which makes them unsuitable to be a
doctor would you have them admitted to study medicine even if their marks
were higher than anybody else's?

Are race based quotas the best solution? I don't know, but there do have
to be maori and PI doctors coming out of med school. The question is more
complicated that just shouting racism and feeling smug.
--
Barry Phease

mailto:***@es.co.nz
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~barryp
Daniel Silva
2004-02-28 11:30:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Barry Phease
Post by Daniel Silva
Assurance accepted. The distinction between admission and grading is but an
artful diversion from the main point of contention. Candidates are admitted
with grades lower than others, who end up being excluded solely because of
their race.
OK so we agree that Brash almost certainly lied about the assessment
question.
No. You agree with yourself. The distinction between admission and grading
is but an artful diversion from the main point of contention.
Post by Barry Phease
Perhaps he is too thick to understand the difference between
admission and assessment.
Let us examine your statement about admission. You say that someone is
excluded solely because of their race. This is plain wrong.
No, that is the plain truth. If you are a Maori, you can get in with lower
grades than white folk. Try to defend that, if you can.
Post by Barry Phease
That person
could have got in if they had achieved higher entry grades, so they were
excluded on the basis of several factors - one of which was race.
Bull.
Post by Barry Phease
The
people who admit students to restricted courses like medicine have to look
at several criteria, of which acaemic performance is ONE important part.
If someone has a personality disorder which makes them unsuitable to be a
doctor would you have them admitted to study medicine even if their marks
were higher than anybody else's?
Are race based quotas the best solution? I don't know, but there do have
to be maori and PI doctors coming out of med school. The question is more
complicated that just shouting racism and feeling smug.
Actually, it is not complicated at all. Reverse racism is really quite easy
to understand.
Brian Harmer
2004-02-28 19:40:00 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 00:30:37 +1300, "Daniel Silva"
Post by Daniel Silva
Post by Barry Phease
OK so we agree that Brash almost certainly lied about the assessment
question.
No. You agree with yourself. The distinction between admission and grading
is but an artful diversion from the main point of contention.
I disagree. There is nothing artful about it. The very clear assertion
was that the tertiary institutions were turning loose people who were
less qualified than the standards require. People engaged in the
system would like the point corrected. It seems to me that if Dr Brash
would admit that point of error, he could get onto the remainder of
his campaign.
Daniel Silva
2004-02-28 20:03:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 00:30:37 +1300, "Daniel Silva"
Post by Daniel Silva
Post by Barry Phease
OK so we agree that Brash almost certainly lied about the assessment
question.
No. You agree with yourself. The distinction between admission and grading
is but an artful diversion from the main point of contention.
I disagree. There is nothing artful about it.
I think that it is artful. It is impossible to defend against the charge
that there is racial discrimination in admissions, so we'll assert that
there is none in grading. Neat, eh?
Post by Brian Harmer
The very clear assertion
was that the tertiary institutions were turning loose people who were
less qualified than the standards require. People engaged in the
system would like the point corrected. It seems to me that if Dr Brash
would admit that point of error, he could get onto the remainder of
his campaign.
Brian Harmer
2004-02-29 01:11:41 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 09:03:45 +1300, "Daniel Silva"
Post by Daniel Silva
I think that it is artful. It is impossible to defend against the charge
that there is racial discrimination in admissions, so we'll assert that
there is none in grading. Neat, eh?
Post by Brian Harmer
The very clear assertion
was that the tertiary institutions were turning loose people who were
less qualified than the standards require. People engaged in the
system would like the point corrected. It seems to me that if Dr Brash
would admit that point of error, he could get onto the remainder of
his campaign.
The grading is externally monitored. The criteria are published. The
only remaining difficulty seems to be that everyone who can testify to
these facts is, by your definition, self-interested, and therefore
untrustworthy.
Simon Pleasants
2004-03-01 08:35:24 UTC
Permalink
"Daniel Silva"
Post by Daniel Silva
The distinction between admission and grading
is but an artful diversion from the main point of contention.
Nonsense. Admission to a university course is not the same as being given
the Degree.
John Cawston
2004-02-27 21:19:15 UTC
Permalink
"Brian Harmer" <***@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message > >> Maharey
is the minister in charge of those institutions. Nevertheless
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by Daniel Silva
Post by Brian Harmer
the institutions have asked for an apology for the lie. The silence
that has followed is deafening.
Next you will be starting threads with "BRASH LIED!!!" The Stephenisation of
Brian Harmer.
Oh come now, Daniel! Sneering at the poster is no substitute for
refuting the point.
I have been assured by many including some who have worked with the
man, that Dr Brash is a man of immense personal integrity. In this
case he has misled the public, possibly because like me, he was under
the mistaken impression that affirmative action in education meant
lower graduating standards. Now that the error has been pointed out to
him, he owes it to the public, to the people he maligned by these
assertions, and to his own reputation, to acknowledge that on that
topic at least, he was wrong.
Too soon to say that.

When this debate started, the public, media, politicians and at least one
university professor (you) believed that Maori and PI had lower graduating
standards. For a start, that there is such a widely held perception is an
absolute indictment on the education system and the Govt to allow such a
perception to develop. If there truly is no race based educating going on
then the unchecked perception is a form of racism in itself.

Secondly, when this debate started, there was an equally widely held view
that schools in NZ were actively discriminating against Pakeha children
wearing religious or other ornamentation whilst Maori were encouraged to do
so. Initially this was considered a minor issue until it was proven that a
number of schools were doing just that.. we got this from the Principal of
Nelson Girls College and John Tamahere himself.

When this started, the principal of having non elected Maori on Councils was
sold to the country on the basis of at least "some" Maori representation.
Then John Tamahere blows the gaff that in Nelson, Maori with 2% of the
population have 50% unelected representation on some council bodies.

When this started, there was a general opinion that there were race based
Govt scholorships. The Govt (IIRC) was rightly unapologetic about this and
it seemed to be accepted until we started seeing the astonishing lengths
that the Parliamentary Library Service was going to promote the policy and
bend out of shape its service to make it "culturally safe" for a couple of
Maori librarians.

The longer this debate goes on, the more evidence we are finding that Brash
is right in substance with his assertions and concerns to the point that it
would be wrong to close it off until we are sure we understand just exactly
whats being said and done in the public's name and whether we agree with it.

IMO Brash would be wrong to apologise until we are sure we understand all
the subtleties of race preferences in our society. We've had 30 years of
being told what we are doing and saying that's racist, so now lets hear the
other side.

JC
Brian Harmer
2004-02-28 05:32:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Cawston
When this debate started, the public, media, politicians and at least one
university professor (you)
I assume you are using the word "professor" very loosely, and not
consistent with its use in New Zealand. I am a lecturer.
Post by John Cawston
believed that Maori and PI had lower graduating
standards. For a start, that there is such a widely held perception is an
absolute indictment on the education system and the Govt to allow such a
perception to develop. If there truly is no race based educating going on
then the unchecked perception is a form of racism in itself.
Public misperceptions apply to all walks of life. There are men, for
example, who believe that women don't really mean it when women say
"no". At whose do would you lay the blame for that?

I agree that I was guilty of nothaving examined a superficially held
misperception of my own. As soon as the allegation and denial was
made, I examined my own real life experience, and was able to see very
easily, that Dr Brash's allegations are flat out wrong.
Post by John Cawston
Secondly, when this debate started, there was an equally widely held view
that schools in NZ were actively discriminating against Pakeha children
wearing religious or other ornamentation whilst Maori were encouraged to do
so. Initially this was considered a minor issue until it was proven that a
number of schools were doing just that.. we got this from the Principal of
Nelson Girls College and John Tamahere himself.
In my opinion the actions at Nelson College are outrageous, and the
human rights commissioner and/or the race relations office should
intervene to prevent such stupidity.
Post by John Cawston
When this started, the principal of having non elected Maori on Councils was
sold to the country on the basis of at least "some" Maori representation.
Then John Tamahere blows the gaff that in Nelson, Maori with 2% of the
population have 50% unelected representation on some council bodies.
When this started, there was a general opinion that there were race based
Govt scholorships. The Govt (IIRC) was rightly unapologetic about this and
it seemed to be accepted until we started seeing the astonishing lengths
that the Parliamentary Library Service was going to promote the policy and
bend out of shape its service to make it "culturally safe" for a couple of
Maori librarians.
The longer this debate goes on, the more evidence we are finding that Brash
is right in substance with his assertions and concerns to the point that it
would be wrong to close it off until we are sure we understand just exactly
whats being said and done in the public's name and whether we agree with it.
I am struggling a little to conect some of your points with the
assertion at issue, namely that Maori are graduating from tertiary
institutions with lower levels of achievement than others. I can find
no evidence to support this. Having made the assertion and had it
refuted, Dr Brash should either stump up with the proof, or
acknowledge that, like me, he had it wrong.
Post by John Cawston
IMO Brash would be wrong to apologise until we are sure we understand all
the subtleties of race preferences in our society. We've had 30 years of
being told what we are doing and saying that's racist, so now lets hear the
other side.
He made a specific allegation. If it is wrong he should correct that,
and if necessary make the revised allegations to which you allude.
John Cawston
2004-02-28 09:24:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by John Cawston
When this debate started, the public, media, politicians and at least one
university professor (you)
I assume you are using the word "professor" very loosely, and not
consistent with its use in New Zealand. I am a lecturer.
Apologies.
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by John Cawston
believed that Maori and PI had lower graduating
standards. For a start, that there is such a widely held perception is an
absolute indictment on the education system and the Govt to allow such a
perception to develop. If there truly is no race based educating going on
then the unchecked perception is a form of racism in itself.
Public misperceptions apply to all walks of life. There are men, for
example, who believe that women don't really mean it when women say
"no". At whose do would you lay the blame for that?
As your words imply, this is not a widely held view.
Post by Brian Harmer
I agree that I was guilty of nothaving examined a superficially held
misperception of my own. As soon as the allegation and denial was
made, I examined my own real life experience, and was able to see very
easily, that Dr Brash's allegations are flat out wrong.
Post by John Cawston
Secondly, when this debate started, there was an equally widely held view
that schools in NZ were actively discriminating against Pakeha children
wearing religious or other ornamentation whilst Maori were encouraged to do
so. Initially this was considered a minor issue until it was proven that a
number of schools were doing just that.. we got this from the Principal of
Nelson Girls College and John Tamahere himself.
In my opinion the actions at Nelson College are outrageous, and the
human rights commissioner and/or the race relations office should
intervene to prevent such stupidity.
Post by John Cawston
When this started, the principal of having non elected Maori on Councils was
sold to the country on the basis of at least "some" Maori representation.
Then John Tamahere blows the gaff that in Nelson, Maori with 2% of the
population have 50% unelected representation on some council bodies.
When this started, there was a general opinion that there were race based
Govt scholorships. The Govt (IIRC) was rightly unapologetic about this and
it seemed to be accepted until we started seeing the astonishing lengths
that the Parliamentary Library Service was going to promote the policy and
bend out of shape its service to make it "culturally safe" for a couple of
Maori librarians.
The longer this debate goes on, the more evidence we are finding that Brash
is right in substance with his assertions and concerns to the point that it
would be wrong to close it off until we are sure we understand just exactly
whats being said and done in the public's name and whether we agree with it.
I am struggling a little to conect some of your points with the
assertion at issue, namely that Maori are graduating from tertiary
institutions with lower levels of achievement than others.
My points are examples where Brash appears substantially correct. If
these are right, then its fair to assume that his claims re education
may also be right.

I can find
Post by Brian Harmer
no evidence to support this. Having made the assertion and had it
refuted, Dr Brash should either stump up with the proof, or
acknowledge that, like me, he had it wrong.
As I started with, it's too early for that.
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by John Cawston
IMO Brash would be wrong to apologise until we are sure we understand all
the subtleties of race preferences in our society. We've had 30 years of
being told what we are doing and saying that's racist, so now lets hear the
other side.
He made a specific allegation.
Which I cant find. Anyone help?

If it is wrong he should correct that,
Post by Brian Harmer
and if necessary make the revised allegations to which you allude.
When we can be sure we understand all the nuances that made up his
allegations.. and the reply from Marhary and the academics.

JC
Brian Harmer
2004-02-28 19:43:04 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 22:24:40 +1300, John Cawston <***@xtra.co.nz>
wrote:

(Big snip)
Post by John Cawston
My points are examples where Brash appears substantially correct. If
these are right, then its fair to assume that his claims re education
may also be right.
John, your arguments are usually more rigorous than that. The claim
about passing out with lower standards is demonstrably wrong.
Daniel Silva
2004-02-28 20:07:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
(Big snip)
Post by John Cawston
My points are examples where Brash appears substantially correct. If
these are right, then its fair to assume that his claims re education
may also be right.
John, your arguments are usually more rigorous than that. The claim
about passing out with lower standards is demonstrably wrong.
Then I will wait for someone to demonstrate it. So far, all we have had is a
bunch of self-interested assertions from a group of people who practise and
advocate racial discrimination in their admission systems.
John Cawston
2004-02-29 03:59:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
(Big snip)
Post by John Cawston
My points are examples where Brash appears substantially correct. If
these are right, then its fair to assume that his claims re education
may also be right.
John, your arguments are usually more rigorous than that. The claim
about passing out with lower standards is demonstrably wrong.
I don't deny that it is, but I'm a fair way from accepting that Brash is
demonstrably wrong until more information comes to hand. At this stage,
there hasnt even been quoted speech from Brash here.

JC
David Pears
2004-02-29 05:07:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Cawston
I don't deny that it is, but I'm a fair way from accepting that Brash is
demonstrably wrong until more information comes to hand. At this stage,
there hasnt even been quoted speech from Brash here.
Really? So the only evidence that Don Brash said anything of the sort
is a press release from Maharey that describes Gerry Brownlee as
National's "colonial affairs spokesman"? I'd been under the
impression that Brash had made some new speech and that the statements
everyone is asking for evidence for are common kmowledge in NZ.

Far from Brash having to prove anything, I think it is up to Brash's
accusers to stump up a statement from him.

David
John Cawston
2004-02-29 06:09:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Pears
Post by John Cawston
I don't deny that it is, but I'm a fair way from accepting that Brash is
demonstrably wrong until more information comes to hand. At this stage,
there hasnt even been quoted speech from Brash here.
Really? So the only evidence that Don Brash said anything of the sort
is a press release from Maharey that describes Gerry Brownlee as
National's "colonial affairs spokesman"?
Didnt happen. It appears the person posting Marhary's speech added that in.

I'd been under the
Post by David Pears
impression that Brash had made some new speech and that the statements
everyone is asking for evidence for are common kmowledge in NZ.
Far from Brash having to prove anything, I think it is up to Brash's
accusers to stump up a statement from him.
I very much want to see Brash's statement to TVNZ, not because I doubt
he made it but because I want to start from first principles. The other
issue is that if this was a televised item, we need to see the words in
context with the interview, questions, answers, sound and appearance.

JC
Post by David Pears
David
R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
2004-02-28 11:23:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
I agree that I was guilty of nothaving examined a superficially held
misperception of my own. As soon as the allegation and denial was
made, I examined my own real life experience, and was able to see very
easily, that Dr Brash's allegations are flat out wrong.
While I do not doubt your experience (or my own lesser yet concurring
experience), I feel I should point out that the fact that it doesn't
happen within the scope of your (or my) knowledge and experience of
the university system, doesn't prove conclusively that it doesn't
happen at all (unless you know the marking habits of every lecturer in
every university, which seems prohibitively improbable).
--
R.G. "Stumpy" Marsh Timaru, New Zealand
<http://marsh.orcon.net.nz/>
Brian Harmer
2004-02-28 19:48:37 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 00:23:07 +1300, R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by Brian Harmer
I agree that I was guilty of nothaving examined a superficially held
misperception of my own. As soon as the allegation and denial was
made, I examined my own real life experience, and was able to see very
easily, that Dr Brash's allegations are flat out wrong.
While I do not doubt your experience (or my own lesser yet concurring
experience), I feel I should point out that the fact that it doesn't
happen within the scope of your (or my) knowledge and experience of
the university system, doesn't prove conclusively that it doesn't
happen at all (unless you know the marking habits of every lecturer in
every university, which seems prohibitively improbable).
Obviously I don't know every situation, but I am familiar with the
generic processes, and with the requirements to have sample
assessments scrutinised by external agencies. Theses are marked by one
person inside the institution, one other NZ person, and one from a
foreign university.

Having made the assertion, surely Dr Brash can come up with at least
one example of a person he believes to have been passed at lower
standards than his or her peers on the grounds of race?

Others in the thread seem to want the system to prove itself innocent,
yet cast doubt on the credibility of the only people who know. Normal
justice requires the accuser, not the accused, to provide proof.
Daniel Silva
2004-02-28 20:23:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
Others in the thread seem to want the system to prove itself innocent,
yet cast doubt on the credibility of the only people who know. Normal
justice requires the accuser, not the accused, to provide proof.
Good point. Yet, I notice that the accusation was sufficient in itself for
you demand an apology from Brash. There appears to be no doubt in your mind.
There is in mine, because Brash usually gets these things right, and
educational bureaucrats have a history of implementing racial
discrimination. But I agree with you that Brash should either produce
evidence to base his claims, or apologise.
R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
2004-02-29 03:01:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
Obviously I don't know every situation, but I am familiar with the
generic processes, and with the requirements to have sample
assessments scrutinised by external agencies. Theses are marked by one
person inside the institution, one other NZ person, and one from a
foreign university.
That's post-grad work though. Is there a similar standard of external
scrutiny for undergraduate work?
Post by Brian Harmer
Having made the assertion, surely Dr Brash can come up with at least
one example of a person he believes to have been passed at lower
standards than his or her peers on the grounds of race?
A person passed on lower grades is one way of proving it. Another
would be to find a document that spells out a policy of this sort
(which may never have been invoked in practice). Still, you're right,
it is about time Brash stumped up with some evidence.
--
R.G. "Stumpy" Marsh Timaru, New Zealand
<http://marsh.orcon.net.nz/>
Brian Harmer
2004-02-29 04:10:27 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 16:01:11 +1300, R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by Brian Harmer
Obviously I don't know every situation, but I am familiar with the
generic processes, and with the requirements to have sample
assessments scrutinised by external agencies. Theses are marked by one
person inside the institution, one other NZ person, and one from a
foreign university.
That's post-grad work though. Is there a similar standard of external
scrutiny for undergraduate work?
Yes. I have just spent three days with the external examiner of an
undergrad programme for which I am, pro tem, the director.
R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
2004-02-29 05:06:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 16:01:11 +1300, R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by Brian Harmer
Obviously I don't know every situation, but I am familiar with the
generic processes, and with the requirements to have sample
assessments scrutinised by external agencies. Theses are marked by one
person inside the institution, one other NZ person, and one from a
foreign university.
That's post-grad work though. Is there a similar standard of external
scrutiny for undergraduate work?
Yes. I have just spent three days with the external examiner of an
undergrad programme for which I am, pro tem, the director.
Okay, that's good to know. And this is (as far as you know)
universally applied practice for university courses - at least for the
seven established universities? And would it be difficult, if not
impossible, to having anything even remotely approaching racially
differentiated standards in practice (as well as in written policy) as
a result?
--
R.G. "Stumpy" Marsh Timaru, New Zealand
<http://marsh.orcon.net.nz/>
Brian Harmer
2004-02-29 07:11:12 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 18:06:43 +1300, R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by Brian Harmer
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 16:01:11 +1300, R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
That's post-grad work though. Is there a similar standard of external
scrutiny for undergraduate work?
Yes. I have just spent three days with the external examiner of an
undergrad programme for which I am, pro tem, the director.
Okay, that's good to know. And this is (as far as you know)
universally applied practice for university courses - at least for the
seven established universities?
Eight* ... but yes. And also for the NZQA politechnics. I and most of
my colleagues are regularly asked to moderate for various other
institutions.
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
And would it be difficult, if not
impossible, to having anything even remotely approaching racially
differentiated standards in practice (as well as in written policy) as
a result?
I believe that to be the case, though "impossible" would be a bit of a
stretch. The mechanics of assessment are fairly transparent. Often
assessment is farmed out, and the marker has no clue about who the
papers belong to. Admittedly, a Maori or Polynesian name on the front
page would be something of a giveaway, but there is just one set of
marking criteria in all assessments that I have ever set, marked or
seen.

I guess if an individual academic wanted to give an individual
candidate (of whatever race or group) an easy ride, it would be
possible. On the other hand, other students are very sensitive to how
well they did compared to their peers, and seem to have ways of
finding out who passed and who didn't. I would think that if such a
thing were happening, there would be plenty of eager whistle blowers.

* Auckland University
Auckland University of Technology
Waikato
Massey
Victoria
Canterbury
Lincoln
Otago
R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
2004-02-29 10:24:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 18:06:43 +1300, R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Okay, that's good to know. And this is (as far as you know)
universally applied practice for university courses - at least for the
seven established universities?
Eight*
I don't count AUT. It's a polytech with delusions of grandeur.
Post by Brian Harmer
... but yes. And also for the NZQA politechnics. I and most of
my colleagues are regularly asked to moderate for various other
institutions.
That's reassuring. Indeed I think I may have recently been in the
presence of such an exercise (scoping and assessment setting) for, at
a guess, an adult educators' course at the local polytech.
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
And would it be difficult, if not
impossible, to having anything even remotely approaching racially
differentiated standards in practice (as well as in written policy) as
a result?
I believe that to be the case, though "impossible" would be a bit of a
stretch.
No system is perfect, so it would be unreasonable to expect it here.

[...]
Post by Brian Harmer
I guess if an individual academic wanted to give an individual
candidate (of whatever race or group) an easy ride, it would be
possible.
...but it would be an anomaly, and potentially career-ending, or at
least career-damaging for the academic, right?
Post by Brian Harmer
On the other hand, other students are very sensitive to how
well they did compared to their peers, and seem to have ways of
finding out who passed and who didn't. I would think that if such a
thing were happening, there would be plenty of eager whistle blowers.
Sure... although there's a certain amount of conflict with the desire
to graduate to be considered - one doesn't lightly piss off people
with the power to make or break one's career. Still, you'd expect the
recent publicity to bring anyone harbouring resentment on this score
to the surface.
--
R.G. "Stumpy" Marsh Timaru, New Zealand
<http://marsh.orcon.net.nz/>
Brian Harmer
2004-02-29 17:59:26 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 23:24:13 +1300, R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by Brian Harmer
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 18:06:43 +1300, R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Okay, that's good to know. And this is (as far as you know)
universally applied practice for university courses - at least for the
seven established universities?
Eight*
I don't count AUT. It's a polytech with delusions of grandeur.
I couldn't possibly comment :-)

Well, perhaps I should. It meets all of the legal requirements
including a sound research programme, and is formally designated as a
university. There is some excellent research emanating from there.
Many excellent universities began life as polytechnics.
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by Brian Harmer
... but yes. And also for the NZQA politechnics. I and most of
my colleagues are regularly asked to moderate for various other
institutions.
That's reassuring. Indeed I think I may have recently been in the
presence of such an exercise (scoping and assessment setting) for, at
a guess, an adult educators' course at the local polytech.
(snip)
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by Brian Harmer
I guess if an individual academic wanted to give an individual
candidate (of whatever race or group) an easy ride, it would be
possible.
...but it would be an anomaly, and potentially career-ending, or at
least career-damaging for the academic, right?
Yep!
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by Brian Harmer
On the other hand, other students are very sensitive to how
well they did compared to their peers, and seem to have ways of
finding out who passed and who didn't. I would think that if such a
thing were happening, there would be plenty of eager whistle blowers.
Sure... although there's a certain amount of conflict with the desire
to graduate to be considered - one doesn't lightly piss off people
with the power to make or break one's career. Still, you'd expect the
recent publicity to bring anyone harbouring resentment on this score
to the surface.
Exactly
R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
2004-02-29 21:15:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 23:24:13 +1300, R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
I don't count AUT. It's a polytech with delusions of grandeur.
I couldn't possibly comment :-)
Well, perhaps I should. It meets all of the legal requirements
including a sound research programme, and is formally designated as a
university. There is some excellent research emanating from there.
Many excellent universities began life as polytechnics.
Fair enough. What I meant (originally) was that the other seven have
been established, as universities, for decades.
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
...but it would be an anomaly, and potentially career-ending, or at
least career-damaging for the academic, right?
Yep!
Thanks, Brian. I, for one, feel considerably better informed.
--
R.G. "Stumpy" Marsh Timaru, New Zealand
<http://marsh.orcon.net.nz/>
Jason M
2004-02-29 11:39:17 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 20:11:12 +1300, Brian Harmer
Post by Brian Harmer
The mechanics of assessment are fairly transparent. Often
assessment is farmed out, and the marker has no clue about who the
papers belong to. Admittedly, a Maori or Polynesian name on the front
page would be something of a giveaway, but there is just one set of
marking criteria in all assessments that I have ever set, marked or
seen.
In the tertiary examinations that I have supervised, the students do
not put their names on the answer books, just their ID number.
On entry to the examination room it is necessary for me to check that
ID number against their ID card with photo, but I have nothing to do
with the marking, and the markers would have no way of finding out the
name.
Brian Harmer
2004-02-29 18:02:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jason M
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 20:11:12 +1300, Brian Harmer
Post by Brian Harmer
The mechanics of assessment are fairly transparent. Often
assessment is farmed out, and the marker has no clue about who the
papers belong to. Admittedly, a Maori or Polynesian name on the front
page would be something of a giveaway, but there is just one set of
marking criteria in all assessments that I have ever set, marked or
seen.
In the tertiary examinations that I have supervised, the students do
not put their names on the answer books, just their ID number.
On entry to the examination room it is necessary for me to check that
ID number against their ID card with photo, but I have nothing to do
with the marking, and the markers would have no way of finding out the
name.
True for formal exams. Not all forms of assessment are conducted as
"registry exams" though. The ones who really worry me are the poor
lost sheep who forget to put their numbers on <sigh!>
Jason M
2004-03-01 04:15:19 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 07:02:25 +1300, Brian Harmer
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by Jason M
In the tertiary examinations that I have supervised, the students do
not put their names on the answer books, just their ID number.
On entry to the examination room it is necessary for me to check that
ID number against their ID card with photo, but I have nothing to do
with the marking, and the markers would have no way of finding out the
name.
True for formal exams. Not all forms of assessment are conducted as
"registry exams" though. The ones who really worry me are the poor
lost sheep who forget to put their numbers on <sigh!>
I check that there is a number when I collect the answer books.
Then I cross-check all the numbers against the list of people sitting
the exam. Then I let them out the door.

If the marking criteria were different between the formal (anonymous
and correctly marked) exams and other assessments, that would be
obvious to anyone looking at all of the marks the student gained.
I doubt that any examiner would dare to mark according to race.
Simon Pleasants
2004-03-01 08:45:45 UTC
Permalink
"R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh"
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
While I do not doubt your experience (or my own lesser yet concurring
experience), I feel I should point out that the fact that it doesn't
happen within the scope of your (or my) knowledge and experience of
the university system, doesn't prove conclusively that it doesn't
happen at all (unless you know the marking habits of every lecturer in
every university, which seems prohibitively improbable).
Stumpy, you're indulging in argumentative pedantic twittery again. In other
words, you're trolling.

Simon Pleasants
2004-02-29 09:51:46 UTC
Permalink
"Brian Harmer"
Post by Brian Harmer
I have been assured by many including some who have worked with the
man, that Dr Brash is a man of immense personal integrity. In this
case he has misled the public, possibly because like me, he was under
the mistaken impression that affirmative action in education meant
lower graduating standards. Now that the error has been pointed out to
him, he owes it to the public, to the people he maligned by these
assertions, and to his own reputation, to acknowledge that on that
topic at least, he was wrong.
Spot on. By refusing to apologise, Brash is making it okay for people to
regard the qualifications of Maori people worthless, whilst regarding
identical qualifications on the office walls of Pakeha people worthwhile.
R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
2004-02-29 10:55:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Pleasants
Spot on. By refusing to apologise, Brash is making it okay for people to
regard the qualifications of Maori people worthless, whilst regarding
identical qualifications on the office walls of Pakeha people worthwhile.
No doubt it'll come up in the general debate on Wednesday (they are
sitting this week, right?). If clear evidence hasn't surfaced by then
(and from what Brian's been saying, it seems to me increasingly
unlikely that any will), that would be an appropriate time to address
the issue, IMO. It is an issue that warrants a little time to play
itself out though - it would be a shame if Brash admitting he was
wrong prevented someone coming forward to confirm he was right.

Has anyone confirmed that he actually made the accusation, yet?

The only quote I've seen says: "Maori New Zealanders are sometimes put
in positions which they are not well qualified for. Non-Maori think
they are incompetent because they are Maori - the reality is they are
not qualified for the job," which is not the same as saying
universities pass Maori when they shouldn't. It suggests to me
something quite different - that Maori are given jobs that they are
not well qualified for as a result of "affirmative action" or simply
the "need" to have Maori staff for various reasons.

Does anyone think that doesn't happen in government departments?
--
R.G. "Stumpy" Marsh Timaru, New Zealand
<http://marsh.orcon.net.nz/>
Daniel Silva
2004-02-29 19:31:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Has anyone confirmed that he actually made the accusation, yet?
The only quote I've seen says: "Maori New Zealanders are sometimes put
in positions which they are not well qualified for. Non-Maori think
they are incompetent because they are Maori - the reality is they are
not qualified for the job," which is not the same as saying
universities pass Maori when they shouldn't. It suggests to me
something quite different - that Maori are given jobs that they are
not well qualified for as a result of "affirmative action" or simply
the "need" to have Maori staff for various reasons.
Is this it? If so, Brian Harmer owes Brash an apology for demanding an
apology for something that Labour propagandists said he said, but didn't.
Quite simple, really :-)
Brian Harmer
2004-02-29 20:12:30 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 08:31:31 +1300, "Daniel Silva"
Post by Daniel Silva
Post by R. G. 'Stumpy' Marsh
Has anyone confirmed that he actually made the accusation, yet?
The only quote I've seen says: "Maori New Zealanders are sometimes put
in positions which they are not well qualified for. Non-Maori think
they are incompetent because they are Maori - the reality is they are
not qualified for the job," which is not the same as saying
universities pass Maori when they shouldn't. It suggests to me
something quite different - that Maori are given jobs that they are
not well qualified for as a result of "affirmative action" or simply
the "need" to have Maori staff for various reasons.
Is this it? If so, Brian Harmer owes Brash an apology for demanding an
apology for something that Labour propagandists said he said, but didn't.
Quite simple, really :-)
Not so. He said more. I heard it on the news with my own ears. I just
don't have access to a transcript of it.
Simon Pleasants
2004-03-01 07:12:29 UTC
Permalink
"Brian Harmer"
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by Daniel Silva
Is this it? If so, Brian Harmer owes Brash an apology for demanding an
apology for something that Labour propagandists said he said, but didn't.
Quite simple, really :-)
Not so. He said more. I heard it on the news with my own ears. I just
don't have access to a transcript of it.
Which transcript are you interested in? I probably already have it.
Brian Harmer
2004-03-01 07:19:17 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 20:12:29 +1300, "Simon Pleasants"
Post by John Cawston
"Brian Harmer"
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by Daniel Silva
Is this it? If so, Brian Harmer owes Brash an apology for demanding an
apology for something that Labour propagandists said he said, but didn't.
Quite simple, really :-)
Not so. He said more. I heard it on the news with my own ears. I just
don't have access to a transcript of it.
Which transcript are you interested in? I probably already have it.
I think it is the one in which he threatened to cut the funding to any
tertiary institution that operated quotas.
John Cawston
2004-03-01 07:51:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 20:12:29 +1300, "Simon Pleasants"
Post by John Cawston
"Brian Harmer"
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by Daniel Silva
Is this it? If so, Brian Harmer owes Brash an apology for demanding an
apology for something that Labour propagandists said he said, but didn't.
Quite simple, really :-)
Not so. He said more. I heard it on the news with my own ears. I just
don't have access to a transcript of it.
Which transcript are you interested in? I probably already have it.
I think it is the one in which he threatened to cut the funding to any
tertiary institution that operated quotas.
Dont forget to add in his clarification: "But he later said he meant
that affirmative action programmes risked leading to the employment of
inferior job applicants."

JC
David Pears
2004-02-29 12:28:42 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 22:51:46 +1300, "Simon Pleasants"
Post by Simon Pleasants
Spot on. By refusing to apologise, Brash is making it okay for people to
regard the qualifications of Maori people worthless, whilst regarding
identical qualifications on the office walls of Pakeha people worthwhile.
But apologise for what? No one has been able to produce a Brash quote
for anything he should apologise.

David
Redbaiter
2004-02-29 19:19:34 UTC
Permalink
David Pears says
Post by David Pears
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 22:51:46 +1300, "Simon Pleasants"
Post by Simon Pleasants
Spot on. By refusing to apologise, Brash is making it okay for people to
regard the qualifications of Maori people worthless, whilst regarding
identical qualifications on the office walls of Pakeha people worthwhile.
But apologise for what? No one has been able to produce a Brash quote
for anything he should apologise.
David
Right.

Part of an NBR article on this-

* "There has been a divisive trend to embody racial distinctions
into large parts of our legislation, extending recently to local
body politics." True or false?

* "Many things happened to the Maori people that should not have
happened. There were injustices, and the treaty process is an
attempt to acknowledge that, and to make a gesture at
recompense. But it is only that. It can be no more than that.
None of us was around at the time of the New Zealand wars. None
of us had anything to do with the confiscations. There is a
limit to how much any generation can apologise for the sins of
its great grandparents." True or false?

* "There are a few radicals who claim that sovereignty never
properly passed from Maori into the hands of the Crown and thus
ultimately into the hands of all New Zealanders, Maori and non-
Maori. They are living in a fantasy world. These claims come
from the more radical Maori end of the spectrum. They can be
seen for what they really are: a negotiating position." True or
false?

* "Too many Maori leaders are looking backward rather than
toward the future. Too many have been encouraged by successive
governments to adopt grievance mode." True or false?

* "Whether intended or not, Parliament [in the State-Owned
Enterprises Act 1986] had created a new concept ­ the 'principles
of the treaty.' But these principles were never defined ­ nobody
had a clue what they might be. In the end, it was left to
unelected Court of Appeal judges to determine an interpretation
of the treaty's meaning that the politicians most certainly
never intended." True or False?

* "The Treaty of Waitangi should not be used as the basis for
giving greater civil, political or democratic rights to any
particular ethnic group." True or false?

http://tinyurl.com/2uf8b
--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low

"One man with courage is a majority." Thomas Jefferson
John Baglow
2004-02-29 21:03:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Pears
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 22:51:46 +1300, "Simon Pleasants"
Post by Simon Pleasants
Spot on. By refusing to apologise, Brash is making it okay for people to
regard the qualifications of Maori people worthless, whilst regarding
identical qualifications on the office walls of Pakeha people worthwhile.
But apologise for what? No one has been able to produce a Brash quote
for anything he should apologise.
David
He was quoted as saying on February 20 on One News that university
graduation (not admission) standards for Maori are relaxed. This is a
patent falsehood. He has not claimed that he was misquoted.

Face it. He's a crude racist liar trying for the backlash vote.
Obviously he's getting some, but Clark is still way out in front. Poor
desperate little man. Poor desperate little followers.

--John Baglow
Robert Singers
2004-02-29 21:23:32 UTC
Permalink
Out from under a rock popped John Baglow and said
Post by John Baglow
Face it. He's a crude racist liar trying for the backlash vote.
Obviously he's getting some, but Clark is still way out in front. Poor
desperate little man. Poor desperate little followers.
Obviously you're an arrogant foreigner who likes to comment on things you
know little about.

The actual situation is far more complex and if you really want to
understand it you can't rely on ranting loonies in NGs or Newspapers and
Radio out for a quick headline.

Frankly John for someone who purports to be involved in the Social
Anthropology field your attitude and behaviour is disappointing.
--
rob singers
pull finger to reply
Credo Elvem ipsum etiam vivere
John Baglow
2004-03-01 03:24:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Singers
Out from under a rock popped John Baglow and said
Post by John Baglow
Face it. He's a crude racist liar trying for the backlash vote.
Obviously he's getting some, but Clark is still way out in front. Poor
desperate little man. Poor desperate little followers.
Obviously you're an arrogant foreigner who likes to comment on things you
know little about.
The actual situation is far more complex and if you really want to
understand it you can't rely on ranting loonies in NGs or Newspapers and
Radio out for a quick headline.
All very well to say the situation is "more complex." Every situation
is complex. But I have read Don Brash, and I think my intepretation
holds. There were those who reacted with shock and anger when people
called Pauline Hanson a racist, too. I mean, gimme a break. The word
"racist" will cease to have any meaning at all if you can't apply it
to people like that. Even the KKK claims not to be "racist" these
days. Sheesh.

--John Baglow
Daniel Silva
2004-02-29 23:15:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Baglow
He was quoted as saying on February 20 on One News that university
graduation (not admission) standards for Maori are relaxed. This is a
patent falsehood.
Quoted by whom? Or do you mean paraphrased by Labour propagandists? Do you
have a reliable transcript of what he said?
Post by John Baglow
He has not claimed that he was misquoted.
Face it. He's a crude racist liar trying for the backlash vote.
Obviously he's getting some, but Clark is still way out in front. Poor
desperate little man. Poor desperate little followers.
--John Baglow
John Baglow
2004-03-01 03:34:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daniel Silva
Post by John Baglow
He was quoted as saying on February 20 on One News that university
graduation (not admission) standards for Maori are relaxed. This is a
patent falsehood.
Quoted by whom? Or do you mean paraphrased by Labour propagandists? Do you
have a reliable transcript of what he said?
No, Daniel, I don't. I know what I've read, and I know he hasn't
claimed to have been misquoted. But this should be a simple problem to
resolve. Doesn't One News provide transcripts for a small fee? If
Brash didn't make the claim that's been reported, it's no big matter
to prove it one way or the other.

In the meantime, his silence is deafening.

--John Baglow
David Pears
2004-03-01 03:38:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Baglow
Post by Daniel Silva
Post by John Baglow
He was quoted as saying on February 20 on One News that university
graduation (not admission) standards for Maori are relaxed. This is a
patent falsehood.
Quoted by whom? Or do you mean paraphrased by Labour propagandists? Do you
have a reliable transcript of what he said?
No, Daniel, I don't. I know what I've read, and I know he hasn't
claimed to have been misquoted. But this should be a simple problem to
resolve. Doesn't One News provide transcripts for a small fee? If
Brash didn't make the claim that's been reported, it's no big matter
to prove it one way or the other.
In the meantime, his silence is deafening.
The silence of his accusers is also deafening. None have been able to
produce a quote of what he said, as opposed to what a Labour Cabinet
Minister would like people to have thought he said.

David
Daniel Silva
2004-03-01 06:17:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Baglow
Post by Daniel Silva
Post by John Baglow
He was quoted as saying on February 20 on One News that university
graduation (not admission) standards for Maori are relaxed. This is a
patent falsehood.
Quoted by whom? Or do you mean paraphrased by Labour propagandists? Do you
have a reliable transcript of what he said?
No, Daniel, I don't. I know what I've read,
You have read claims made by Labour propagandists about what Brash is
supposed to have said. That's all.
Post by John Baglow
and I know he hasn't
claimed to have been misquoted. But this should be a simple problem to
resolve. Doesn't One News provide transcripts for a small fee?
Please do let me know how you got on. I'll go you halves on the fee :-)
Post by John Baglow
If Brash didn't make the claim that's been reported, it's no big matter
to prove it one way or the other.
In the meantime, his silence is deafening.
--John Baglow
Jason M
2004-03-01 04:45:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Baglow
Post by David Pears
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 22:51:46 +1300, "Simon Pleasants"
Post by Simon Pleasants
Spot on. By refusing to apologise, Brash is making it okay for people to
regard the qualifications of Maori people worthless, whilst regarding
identical qualifications on the office walls of Pakeha people worthwhile.
But apologise for what? No one has been able to produce a Brash quote
for anything he should apologise.
David
He was quoted as saying on February 20 on One News that university
graduation (not admission) standards for Maori are relaxed. This is a
patent falsehood. He has not claimed that he was misquoted.
Face it. He's a crude racist liar trying for the backlash vote.
Obviously he's getting some, but Clark is still way out in front. Poor
desperate little man. Poor desperate little followers.
This morning in an interview on Radio NZ, Brownlee managed to lose the
votes of the Anglicans and Catholics, by being very rude to the
bishops. I wonder if he first checked with Brash that he was supposed
to do that.
So National have gained some rednecks and lost the religious vote.
What's next?
Redbaiter
2004-03-01 05:09:26 UTC
Permalink
Jason M says
Post by Jason M
Post by John Baglow
Post by David Pears
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 22:51:46 +1300, "Simon Pleasants"
Post by Simon Pleasants
Spot on. By refusing to apologise, Brash is making it okay for people to
regard the qualifications of Maori people worthless, whilst regarding
identical qualifications on the office walls of Pakeha people worthwhile.
But apologise for what? No one has been able to produce a Brash quote
for anything he should apologise.
David
He was quoted as saying on February 20 on One News that university
graduation (not admission) standards for Maori are relaxed. This is a
patent falsehood. He has not claimed that he was misquoted.
Face it. He's a crude racist liar trying for the backlash vote.
Obviously he's getting some, but Clark is still way out in front. Poor
desperate little man. Poor desperate little followers.
This morning in an interview on Radio NZ, Brownlee managed to lose the
votes of the Anglicans and Catholics, by being very rude to the
bishops. I wonder if he first checked with Brash that he was supposed
to do that.
Isn't stalking posters on usenet, and making false allegations
about them rude? What an incredible display of delusion that a
piece of usenet filth such as you has the utter delusional gall
to adjudge another person as rude.

Brownlee may be many things, but he's very unlikely to be the
kind of oily obsequious snooping creeping psychotic arsehole
that you are.
--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low

"One man with courage is a majority." Thomas Jefferson
Daniel Silva
2004-03-01 06:14:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jason M
Post by John Baglow
Post by David Pears
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 22:51:46 +1300, "Simon Pleasants"
Post by Simon Pleasants
Spot on. By refusing to apologise, Brash is making it okay for people to
regard the qualifications of Maori people worthless, whilst regarding
identical qualifications on the office walls of Pakeha people worthwhile.
But apologise for what? No one has been able to produce a Brash quote
for anything he should apologise.
David
He was quoted as saying on February 20 on One News that university
graduation (not admission) standards for Maori are relaxed. This is a
patent falsehood. He has not claimed that he was misquoted.
Face it. He's a crude racist liar trying for the backlash vote.
Obviously he's getting some, but Clark is still way out in front. Poor
desperate little man. Poor desperate little followers.
This morning in an interview on Radio NZ, Brownlee managed to lose the
votes of the Anglicans and Catholics, by being very rude to the
bishops. I wonder if he first checked with Brash that he was supposed
to do that.
So National have gained some rednecks and lost the religious vote.
What's next?
Interesting interpretation. I thought that the impact of the interview (if
any) would be to make some religious folk aware that the Bishops are among
the most cringing exponents of political correctness in this country. But
then again, most of them would have known that already.
Jason M
2004-03-01 08:35:00 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 19:14:16 +1300, "Daniel Silva"
Post by Daniel Silva
Post by Jason M
Post by John Baglow
He was quoted as saying on February 20 on One News that university
graduation (not admission) standards for Maori are relaxed. This is a
patent falsehood. He has not claimed that he was misquoted.
Face it. He's a crude racist liar trying for the backlash vote.
Obviously he's getting some, but Clark is still way out in front. Poor
desperate little man. Poor desperate little followers.
This morning in an interview on Radio NZ, Brownlee managed to lose the
votes of the Anglicans and Catholics, by being very rude to the
bishops. I wonder if he first checked with Brash that he was supposed
to do that.
So National have gained some rednecks and lost the religious vote.
What's next?
Interesting interpretation. I thought that the impact of the interview (if
any) would be to make some religious folk aware that the Bishops are among
the most cringing exponents of political correctness in this country. But
then again, most of them would have known that already.
Brownlee came across in the interview as a rude anti-religious bully.
Even non-religious people would say that the bishop was polite and
made a lot of sense, and Brownlee did neither of those.

There would be a whole lot of elderly people who have their AM radios
rusted to the position of National Radio who will now be reviewing
which party other than National they will vote for next election.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3552205

Mr Brownlee squared off with Richard Randerson, the assistant Anglican
bishop of Auckland, on National Radio today.
Bishop Randerson said the statement was based on facts.
"Over the last 20 years there have been huge improvements in Maori
health and education," he said.
"It will be a disaster for Maori, a disaster for New Zealand, if Maori
are not well provided for."

Mr Brownlee disputed that, saying Maori were "still at the bottom of
the heap" and patronising programmes had not helped.
"Maori are being sold down the creek by this sort of sickly liberal
thinking that the bishops are trying to foist on us," he said.
"I think your proclamation shows a degree of weak and sloppy
thinking."

Bishop Randerson said programmes that were working should be enhanced,
not stopped.
The bishops said in their statement the Treaty of Waitangi could not
be ignored or made to go away.
David Pears
2004-03-01 07:05:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jason M
This morning in an interview on Radio NZ, Brownlee managed to lose the
votes of the Anglicans and Catholics, by being very rude to the
bishops. I wonder if he first checked with Brash that he was supposed
to do that.
I'd have thought that anyone so wet and useless as to care what a
bishop thought is likely to be too useless to find their way to a
polling booth on election day.

Face it, people go to church out of habit. No one believes in the
supernatural these days. And no one listens to bishops, who live in a
little world of their own full of ancient languages and supernatural
powers and have little contact with the real world.

David
Jason M
2004-03-01 08:18:54 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 16:35:04 +0930, David Pears
Post by David Pears
Post by Jason M
This morning in an interview on Radio NZ, Brownlee managed to lose the
votes of the Anglicans and Catholics, by being very rude to the
bishops. I wonder if he first checked with Brash that he was supposed
to do that.
I'd have thought that anyone so wet and useless as to care what a
bishop thought is likely to be too useless to find their way to a
polling booth on election day.
Face it, people go to church out of habit. No one believes in the
supernatural these days. And no one listens to bishops, who live in a
little world of their own full of ancient languages and supernatural
powers and have little contact with the real world.
I'm certainly not a religious person myself. But many right-wing
voters are religious so I was surprised at Brownlees rudeness to the
bishop and his readiness to chuck away the many votes of the Anglicans
and Catholics.
Redbaiter
2004-03-01 08:36:39 UTC
Permalink
Jason M says
Post by Jason M
I'm certainly not a religious person myself.
No, religious people generally have better manners than creeps
like you.
Post by Jason M
But many right-wing
voters are religious
What crap. You wouldn't know a "right wing voter" if one smacked
you on that big ugly red nose you keep poking into other
people's business..
Post by Jason M
so I was surprised at Brownlees rudeness to the
bishop and his readiness to chuck away the many votes of the Anglicans
and Catholics.
You have already said this once. For fucks sake get a life you
wheedling whining non event..
--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low

"One man with courage is a majority." Thomas Jefferson
Brian Dooley
2004-02-28 18:58:07 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:20:40 +1300, "Daniel Silva"
Post by Daniel Silva
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by Peter
The institutions are quite capable of seeking their own apologies or
accepting that the hat fits.
Maharey is the minister in charge of those institutions. Nevertheless
the institutions have asked for an apology for the lie. The silence
that has followed is deafening.
Next you will be starting threads with "BRASH LIED!!!" The Stephenisation of
Brian Harmer.
You mean that Brash, like Bush, spoke out of ignorance rather
than malice?

Got it.
--
Brian Dooley

Wellington New Zealand
Daniel Silva
2004-02-28 20:09:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Harmer
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:20:40 +1300, "Daniel Silva"
Post by Daniel Silva
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by Peter
The institutions are quite capable of seeking their own apologies or
accepting that the hat fits.
Maharey is the minister in charge of those institutions. Nevertheless
the institutions have asked for an apology for the lie. The silence
that has followed is deafening.
Next you will be starting threads with "BRASH LIED!!!" The Stephenisation of
Brian Harmer.
You mean that Brash, like Bush, spoke out of ignorance rather
than malice?
Got it.
You're acting a bit like steve too. Did something stange happen to the
Wellington water supply?
Peter
2004-02-27 18:31:31 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:51:27 +1300, Brian Harmer
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by Peter
There is nothing Steve can do that will
help them. I do not know why Steve wasnts to help the Universities at
present when he plans to sack the Chancellors and Councils and appoint
his own shills instead.
He is the minister
So you are quite happy for unversities to be under direct Ministerial
control and to hell with academic freedom. Funny that Janice started
a threat to academic freedom thread a little while ago.
Brian Harmer
2004-02-28 04:53:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:51:27 +1300, Brian Harmer
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by Peter
There is nothing Steve can do that will
help them. I do not know why Steve wasnts to help the Universities at
present when he plans to sack the Chancellors and Councils and appoint
his own shills instead.
He is the minister
So you are quite happy for unversities to be under direct Ministerial
control and to hell with academic freedom. Funny that Janice started
a threat to academic freedom thread a little while ago.
Does "non sequitur" mean anything to you?
Peter
2004-02-28 07:47:54 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:53:29 +1300, Brian Harmer
Post by Brian Harmer
Does "non sequitur" mean anything to you?
Yes.
Brian Harmer
2004-02-28 08:13:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter
On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:53:29 +1300, Brian Harmer
Post by Brian Harmer
Does "non sequitur" mean anything to you?
Yes.
Good
steve
2004-02-27 09:52:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter
Labour is caught like an opossum in glaring headlights and is doing
anything to wriggle out of the web of its own making.
...and some voters appear to want them to do just that.....or why complain?
David Pears
2004-02-27 14:53:00 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:26:02 +1300, Brian Harmer
Post by Brian Harmer
Post by Peter
Post by Pulp Fixxion
to Dr Brash this morning repeating his demand that he apologise for
the comments made on One News last Thursday.
Steve Maharey is away with the fairies. Since when did a Labour
member apologise to a National member (except to avoid ejection)?
The apology sought is not to Maharey, but to the institutions Dr Brash
has misled the public about.
Post by Peter
Why should this time be different?
See above.
Are you sure the original item wasn't a satire of some sort? The
description of Gerry Brownlee as "colonial affairs spokesperson" is a
bit strange in a ministerial press release...

| The comments were
| repeated by National's colonial affairs spokesperson Gerry Brownlee on
| 20/20 last night.

Also the bit...

| "The nation's universities, the Institute of Professional Engineers,
| the Nursing Council, the Medical Council and the Dental Council have
| all confirmed that Dr Brash's claims are wrong.

...is a bit sloppy for an official release. None of those bodies could
confirm that the claims were wrong, only that the claims did not apply
to themselves.

If this is an actual press release, rather than some satire, then it
was stupid. There are a lot of rather dodgy educational institutions
around these days, many targetted at Maori and a few with a dodgy
approach to financing. I recall some of these encouraging students to
purchase computers with student loans, then sell them and drop out of
their course. And of students being told to purchase mobile phones as
part of some odd course requirement. I have no doubt that Brash will
be able to dig out examples of students being marked differently, or
having to meet different requirements based on race, once his accusers
have dug themselves deep enough.

Take for example the own goals scored by Labour in recent days. A
minister standing up in parliament and attacking an opposition
member's wife, only to illustrate why university racial quotas are bad
for ethnic minorities. And, after the government had denied that
schoold discriminated, we find a clear cut example of a student being
treated differently than Maori students, and assaulted as well.

Labour are in free fall. They are floundering around watching their
popularity and policies turn to shit, and this badly worded item,
assuming it is real and not some joke, is just another gruesome
example. It ain't pretty... but it's going to be fun watching them
implode over the next few months. I predict it will only be a matter
of time before their coalition partners start jumping. Labour won't
last the full term.

David
Species
2004-02-28 00:49:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pulp Fixxion
Brash must put up or apologise for university slur
The government is continuing to demand that National Party leader Don
Brash apologise for falsely claiming universities are lowering their
standards to let Maori students graduate.
to Dr Brash this morning repeating his demand that he apologise for
the comments made on One News last Thursday. The comments were
repeated by National's colonial affairs spokesperson Gerry Brownlee on
20/20 last night. New Zealand's universities and the key professional
associations have since confirmed in writing that, contrary to Dr
Brash's claims, the standards for graduation and entry to professional
associations have never been lowered for Maori or any other group.
The university course information material I was given made it clear in
print that Maoris were given special dispensation upon request to enter
courses they wouldn't otherwise be able to get into. I think it was even
stated as being "affirmative action". Course attendence numbers are
finate, so any entries under affirmative action would probably push out
those with higher marks. If someone still has their university course
prospectus information, they may like to scan and post the relevant
sections online.
Brian Harmer
2004-02-28 05:33:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Species
The university course information material I was given made it clear in
print that Maoris were given special dispensation upon request to enter
courses they wouldn't otherwise be able to get into. I think it was even
stated as being "affirmative action". Course attendence numbers are
finate, so any entries under affirmative action would probably push out
those with higher marks. If someone still has their university course
prospectus information, they may like to scan and post the relevant
sections online.
But that's not the point. The question is whether they are graduating
with lower achievement levels than others. I can find no evidence to
support that.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...