Rata's Belief in the Primacy of English

It is good to see people beginning to question the guidance Stanford is receiving, and from whom. It is clear that even from the earliest days of her role as Minister of Education, she was more inclined to defer to voices outside the Ministry.

I think we must see her decisions in that light.

Elizabeth Rata has been at the centre of many of the education initiatives since Stanford assumed office. She was appointed to the curriculum MAG, despite never being a name put forward by the Ministry – perhaps her long relationship with Johnston (Stanford's pick for Chair despite the Ministry recommending someone else) helped? She was the lead of the years 7-13 English curriculum writing team. She is on the Charter School Authorisation Board.

Rata does not hide her aim: curriculum as the "circuit breaker in replacing the Learning Approach and ending decolonisation's success". The English language plays a key role in that. That she has Te Whāriki in her sights is alarming.

For instance, she wrote to David Seymour this:

To which his response was, "This is absolutely brilliant. Thank you for sending it. You are by far the most articulate exponent of enlightenment thinking and need to get far more exposure."

This is the kind of ideological stew our ministers of education are swimming in. Rata constantly lands in their inbox, many of the emails referencing having met or spoken to them, with the content serving to keep the abreast of her latest work.

When someone is explicit in their aim to end decolonisation's success, when they state that English forms NZ's cultural repertoire, not te reo Māori, that the English language and a re-invigorated NZ democracy go hand-in-hand, and that person is a constant presence in key roles and inboxes, huge questions must be asked about the ideological foundations for these education changes.