Nats smear kindergartens

Written By: - Date published: 10:19 am, July 25th, 2011 - 57 comments
Categories: education - Tags:

Tolley’s running a nasty little smear through Cameron Slater. See, non-profit kindergartens have millions in the bank while saying they need more cash. It must be a rip-off, eh? Yeah. Nah. The kindergartens just have the cash they’ve been given for future operations. So, why is Tolley trying to make this an issue?

According to Slater, the nations kindergartens have a total of $60 million in the bank. That seems like a lot until you learn the simple truth. The government pays its subsidies to the kindergartens in advance 3 times a year. Naturally, lots of money in the banks after the payments come through, nearly none at the end.

Also, associations build up cash for future investments. Like opening a new kindergarten.

How much is $60 million anyway? Not a hell of a lot. A couple of months turnover by the looks.

So, it’s a beat up. Obviously coming from Tolley, who added:

“the “substantial reserves” built up through taxpayer funding and fees from parents would be an eye-opener for many families.”

Obvious what the game is here. Kindergartens and other ECE providers are opposing National’s cuts to ECE spending. Those cuts are forcing ECE providers to cut services or increase fees. If she was a good minister, Tolley would openly admit that she’s cut funding and defend it. But Tolley won’t admit she’s made cuts.

So what’s she gonna do when the providers complain about them? She’s gonna smear them. No matter how bullshit the smear. Anything to distract, and confuse the issue. It’s a pretty tough act though. Labeling one of our most trusted institutions as greedy fraudsters.

Slinging that kind of shit is bound to have a lot of blowback. No wonder she gave it to Slater to run.

57 comments on “Nats smear kindergartens ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. queenstfarmer 1
    25 July 2011 at 10:47 am

    You do realise that in the article you link to, the Kindergartens CEO herself admits there are “large surpluses”?

    PS you refer to running nasty smears. I suppose it is too much to expect for you to express any remorse over your vile exploitation of the death of 90+ people in Norway by deliberately misquoting Key to score a cheap political point.

    • weka 1.1
      25 July 2011 at 11:07 am

      What, this CEO?
       

       
      NZ Kindergartens chief executive Clare Wells said there was more to the big bank balances than met the eye – and it was important to note that they were for last year, and did not include the funding cuts.
      “I think we are going to see some very, very different figures in a year,” she said.
      Ms Wells said kindergartens were charities and therefore not run to make a profit.
      Large bank balances might well reflect the fact that money was given by the Ministry of Education in three large sums throughout the year and was in the bank to pay wages for the following quarter, she said.
      The large surpluses were often used for things such as building new centres or expanding existing ones.
       

      • queenstfarmer 1.1.1
        25 July 2011 at 12:28 pm

        Yep that’s the one, the last sentence.

        • Colonial Viper 1.1.1.1
          25 July 2011 at 12:32 pm

          The one where she said capital was being used appropriately to fulfill her organisations purpose?

          • felix 1.1.1.1.1
            25 July 2011 at 12:37 pm

            Nah, the invisible (but so obvious) next one where she talks about how much it cost to dig her money pit and line it with rubies.

          • queenstfarmer 1.1.1.1.2
            25 July 2011 at 1:45 pm

            Yes, how many last sentences are you seeing this early in the day? It is pleasing to know that they have “large surpluses”, even though it doesn’t square with crying poor.

            • mik e 1.1.1.1.2.1
              25 July 2011 at 3:54 pm

              Hows the K road alotment going farmer out of a $1.4billion sector its not very large

            • Georgecom 1.1.1.1.2.2
              26 July 2011 at 9:57 pm

              This CEO who made these comments:

              NZ Kindergartens chief executive Clare Wells said there was more to the big bank balances than met the eye – and it was important to note that they were for last year, and did not include the funding cuts. “I think we are going to see some very, very different figures in a year,” she said.

              That is, funding cuts have been absorbed thus far by cutting spending in some areas. Money that was formerly put aside for building new centres, capital expenditure, might be used up in operation expenses.

              There is a letter in todays NZ Herald from a Kindergarten CEO which outlines where funding is spent. At the end of the year, nothing left really.

    • bbfloyd 1.2
      25 July 2011 at 11:26 am

      strange sort of emotional imbalance you have there queeny.. maybe you should be renaming yourself “K Rd farmer”. that would make more sense.

      there certainly isn’t a skerrick of sense, or accuracy in any of that last spew. in fact, there is an abundance of ugly..

  2. Pete George 2
    25 July 2011 at 10:54 am

    Zetetic, your words on smearing: “Slinging that kind of shit is bound to have a lot of blowback.”

    • Colonial Viper 2.1
      25 July 2011 at 12:34 pm

      You have a real fixation with “smearing”. I suggest tracking down where that’s come from using professional help.

      • wtl 2.1.1
        25 July 2011 at 12:38 pm

        In my opinion, it’s all down to promoting his “New Way of Doing Things”(TM) – he uses whatever opportunity he can to suggest that all other political parties do bad things like smearing and not listening to people. That’s why we should all vote for his Your NZ party. Unfortunately, if his behaviour here is anything to go by, I can’t really see him getting many votes.

    • mik e 2.2
      25 July 2011 at 3:57 pm

      PG it wouldn,t be the Slater slipping on the Whaleoil type smearing were talking about

  3. mickysavage 3
    25 July 2011 at 11:05 am

    Troll attack warning.
     
    You can tell you have got them engaged in spin when they avoid the content of the post.  So is Slater spinning BS or not?  Looks like it.
     
    So they trot out the old “John Key did not say that if Norway’s attrocity was committed by Muslims then NZ’s presence in Afghanistan is justified” line.
     
    You know then that Key has stuffed up big time.  RWNJs start spinning out of control.
     
    If only we could hook them up to generators.  The country would become carbon neutral in an instant.
     
     

    • weka 3.1
      25 July 2011 at 11:10 am

      Yeah but aren’t we meant to be avoiding dirty energy sources?

    • Pete George 3.2
      25 July 2011 at 11:17 am

      “You can tell you have got them engaged in spin when they avoid the content of the post.”

      How many times have you posted today?
      How many times have you avoided the content of the post?
      Once you avoided understanding the whole point of the post in your spin efforts.

      Zetetic is not even making a serious attempt to address kindergarten funding issues (which deserve proper attention. This is a post on smearing. And on hypocrisy.

      • mickysavage 3.2.1
        25 July 2011 at 3:07 pm

        How many times have you posted today?

        About half as many as you.

        How many times have you avoided the content of the post?

        Um I have not although I have tried to point out how appalling some of your comments are.

        Once you avoided understanding the whole point of the post in your spin efforts.

        What the?

        Zetetic is saying that contrary to the spin Kindergardens are not flush with cash.  The smear is from your mate Slater.  Care to argue that? 

        • Pete George 3.2.1.1
          25 July 2011 at 3:21 pm

          I don’t know the financial circumstances of any Kindergartens.

          Do you seriously think the funding of Kindergartens was the main point this post was trying to address? And not a smear on smears?

          • felix 3.2.1.1.1
            25 July 2011 at 3:56 pm

            He didn’t say it was. He said the post is about Slater being full of shit.

            You’re not even good at this.

          • Ianupnorth 3.2.1.1.2
            25 July 2011 at 4:56 pm

            Ah, so you’re the bloke that wrote this Pete

            If Zetetic is Trevor Mallard it further dents Mallard’s online and political credibility. If it is someone connect to Mallard, same. It is obviously someone close to the Labour Party – this reflects very poorly on Labour, especially because the frequent attacks are gutless and anonymous.

            Shows a bit of an agenda I would say. Show us how you come to the conclusion drawn above? maybe ask blubber boy for some help, he likes collecting data and drawing conclusions inappropriately.

            • Pete George 3.2.1.1.2.1
              25 July 2011 at 5:09 pm

              I said “if”, now I’m fairly sure now it’s not Trevor.

              What I said still stands, it still reflects poorly on Labour because there is fairly obviously a Labour orientated agenda. That doesn’t mean Labour is behind it, it could easily be a single person thinking they’re fighting for the cause, but it’s not very brave and not very wise.

              And it’s likely to be not very successful. Beyond the dedicated who can see no wrong from their own it more often provokes an eye rolling response. I think it’s embarrassing for Labour, and I know it’s embarrassing for some who are usually Labour voters.

              • Ianupnorth …
                25 July 2011 at 5:14 pm

                So, do you think by posting here you are going to recruit people for John Key’s Barmy Army?
                 
                Frankly most of us here are embarrased by this government, by how it says one thing and does another, e.g. employing Peter Gluckman, saying they will follow his recommendations (which were to invest in early brain development) and then slashing ECE funding.
                 
                The word that springs to mind is hypocrisy; similar to those who through stones at various labour MP’s during the last Labour govt. but don’t like it happening to them.

                • Pete George …
                  25 July 2011 at 5:20 pm

                  “employing Peter Gluckman, saying they will follow his recommendations (which were to invest in early brain development)”

                  See what they come up with this week with the Green Paper on Children.

                  Every child deserves the chance to thrive, belong and achieve but not every child gets that opportunity in New Zealand.

                  How we change that is the single most important debate this country can have.

                  It’s about New Zealand’s children; about how we care for and protect them, the trade-offs and sacrifices we’re prepared to make and the opportunities we want them to have.

                  That’s why we wrote this Green Paper, which is a discussion document outlining ideas the Government wants to test with you before making decisions.

                  Some of the issues in this paper will make you feel uncomfortable, you should be uncomfortable, you should be angry.

                  Too many of our children are needlessly suffering and too many are dying. But it doesn’t have to be that way.

                  It is time to be part of the solution New Zealand.

                  I hope this doesn’t just become another political football, vulnerable children and the considerable short and long term problems associated with them deserve a decent look at this.

                  • Deadly_NZ …
                    26 July 2011 at 9:22 am

                    It already is. There was Pudding Bennett bleating on like she actually cared. But all the budget cuts to ECE tells us she don’t give a damn for anything, except sucking on the public teat.

                    • Pete George …
                      26 July 2011 at 9:32 am

                      That illustrates the worst of NZ politics an why many voters have had a gutsful of it, including the selfish anti everything approach.

                      Everyone on blogs has agendas. Some are at least open and honest.

                  • rosy …
                    26 July 2011 at 9:39 am

                    Yeah Pete, that does illustrate the worst in NZ politics. Cutting the ECE budgets – the very best way of making sure children are visible, socialised and cared for. And then crying tears for the ones that are isolated, stuck in substandard housing with violent caregivers. You’d thing she’s pay attention to her scientific advisor wouldn’t you? Otherwise why did they proudly show off their commitment *cough* to policy based on sound evidence?

                    • Pete George …
                      26 July 2011 at 9:49 am

                      Just keep opposing everything until Labour get back in then. The worst off babies will have become school’s problem by then.

                    • rosy …
                      26 July 2011 at 9:53 am

                      No Pete, you’ve missed the point completely. Decimating ECE is opposing good practice. I’m FOR good practice for NZs young children. Why do you oppose it?

                      Oh, and some of those worst off babies won’t make it to school.

                    • Pete George …
                      26 July 2011 at 10:02 am

                      Oh, and some of those worst off babies won’t make it to school.

                      And some won’t make it to kindergarten either.

                      I’m not against proper funding of kinderdgartens and playcentres, but many of the most vulnerable children have had major problems before they get to that age and many probably won’t go near pre-school education anyway. They need special attention beyond ECE.

                    • rosy …
                      26 July 2011 at 10:27 am

                      Oh right. So you’re out there protesting about funding cuts to ECE, or say women’s refuges, DHBs reviewing maternity costs, autism spectrum disorder groups that have had funding cuts, cuts to benefits and increases in GST that see children in poor families go without… Good onya.

              • Deadly_NZ …
                26 July 2011 at 9:19 am

                Yep and Whaleslime and that poisonous dwarf DPF Don’t have an adgenda??? Of course they do and it’s to spin, spin, lie, and cheat. And if you have read any of the one eyed bullshit that is written on either’s website you would see that. But as you are a Spinning troll then nothing we say you believe, and 99% of the shit you write does not get read,

    • TightyRighty 3.3
      25 July 2011 at 12:12 pm

      haven’t you got an ambulance to chase?

    • mik e 3.4
      25 July 2011 at 2:22 pm

      THE continual propaganda national supporters are blogging on these sites make me wonder if Roger Douglas is trying to take over the Labour party as well as ACT in his retirement.When ever anyone posts anything against National opinion on independent as well as this webb site the amount of mis information abusive bullying is phenomenal thats why we should just stick to proving factual inaccuracies wrong and putting our message out there and using humor wit and satire are much better tools than abuse.We on the left have suffered enough lets not buy into their game!

  4. joe90 4
    25 July 2011 at 11:13 am

    Kindergartens and other ECE providers are opposing National’s cuts to ECE spending. Those cuts are forcing ECE providers to cut services or increase fees.

    Of course they’re going to smear non-profits like Kindergarten , one of their most prolific online cheerleaders is the owner of several baby farms.

  5. pollywog 5
    25 July 2011 at 11:21 am

    Oh yeah, our kindy is flush to the eyeballs with cash. It’s like Scrooge McDucks money bin everytime i drop the littlie off there.

    That’s why they’ve had to cut staff and increase the voluntary parent donation from $20 a term, to $50 and why our lovely teaching ladies are all looking a bit weary.

    Tolley’s a fucken idiot and Slaters a dung eating bottom feeder…IMHO

  6. Colonial Viper 6
    25 July 2011 at 11:42 am

    NATs modus operandi is to smear whatever minority group they want to attack. It’s like Right Wing artillery shelling before sending in the shock troops to smash the kindies.

    Totally authoritarian and sociopathic.

    • Pete George 6.1
      25 July 2011 at 11:48 am

      Labour are no better, at least in attempting to smear.

    • Pete George 6.2
      25 July 2011 at 11:52 am

      Why not reject nasty kinds of politics from any party? What you accuse National of is prevalent from other parties too, for example Act and Labour don’t seem any better.

      • mik e 6.2.1
        25 July 2011 at 12:18 pm

        Yeah the Nats have their hands on 12billion dollars worth of assets it make sense to them to sell them for 1/2 price 6billion dollars this is their sick rational.Sir Peter Gluckman their chief science advisor says we should be spending more on early childhood education, what do the nats do cut spending, bean brain bean counters!Short term thinking the only type National party Know, laissez fair sh,ell be right economics from right wing political comics

      • felix 6.2.2
        25 July 2011 at 12:40 pm

        it puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again

  7. Darren 7
    25 July 2011 at 11:51 am

    Probably way off topic, but a good comparison, imho.

    The last I heard, the NZRU was sitting on $60 mil in their accounts, while the taxpayer funds their rugby tournament.

    I look forward to the same amount of vitriol being heaped upon the NZRU by Slater and a press release from the minister for the Rugby World Cup condemning this waste of money.

    Now that would be an eye opener.

    That is all.

    • Ianupnorth 7.1
      25 July 2011 at 4:58 pm

      Pretty damned good comparison; similar to Waikato RFU having their own ‘Pub Charity’ called the Grassroots Trust that takes pokies monies from the poor all over the country and distributes to certain sporting organisations in the Waikato.

  8. JS 8
    25 July 2011 at 11:57 am

    The government’s cuts to Playcentre funding are also really sad considering Tolley made a great show of courting Playcentre parents’ support in 2008 with empty promises, and many voted for the National Party on that basis.

  9. tc 9
    25 July 2011 at 12:39 pm

    If it sooo good then let’s see AyaTolley front it and explain it rather than use such Oracle’s as Slater and all the kudos and integrity that brings….looking forward to more excellent material from her along with Bennett, Wilkinson, Collins and who ever fronts womens affairs for the gov’t these days.

  10. Terry 10
    25 July 2011 at 1:22 pm

    If anything is an “eye-opener” it is Tolley herself (though driven by Key, like all Ministers).
    pollywog has the correcct ideas (above). One can only trust that “many families” will see clearly exactly what is happening here.

  11. jackal 11
    25 July 2011 at 2:17 pm

    It seems Cameron Slater AKA higherstandard is trying to say you’re Trevor Mallard Zetetic. Well whoever you are, I enjoy reading your blogs.

    Personally I think Anne Tolly is a complete troll for attempting to degrade kindergartens by providing Slater with information for his disinformation campaign. It’s shameful!

    [lprent: Zet isn’t Trevor Mallard. If a sitting MP is to blog here then they have to do it under their own name in a Guest Post. I’d also be asking why they don’t do it at their parties blog for MP’s. We have been known to reprint some posts from MP’s under “The Standard” – mostly from Red Alert. ]

  12. ropata 12
    25 July 2011 at 3:21 pm

    Another attack on the working poor and children from the Nats.
    Expect widepread closures of playcentres and kindergartens around poor areas of the country.

    No doubt fancy pre-school facilities in expensive suburbs will continue to be just fine, so the NACToids don’t care.

  13. prism 13
    25 July 2011 at 3:55 pm

    Government beneficiaries are not allowed to save up for anything. The same simplistic, thoughtless practice is being shown to private kindergartens.

    Grants for special needs are now often loans, though originally it was recognised that the low levels of benefits that Ruthless introduced would need boosting at times. Until they have cleared their bank accounts of savings they might have put by for some future bill or plan beneficiaries can’t get any assistance with urgent needs, large unexpected bills, or personal medical or dental costs that are outside their basic living allowance. This approach does not serve the needs of those beneficiaries who are trying to live independent useful lives. And the attitude that is applied to beneficiaries is certainly not appropriate for businesses whether for or not-for profit.

  14. Jum 14
    26 July 2011 at 12:33 am

    This government’s main target is women. Look carefully at their policies; they all weaken women’s rights and equal placing in this society.

    This is just one more nail in the coffin of women’s personal safety and financial independence and any future chance of real equality of opportunity for their children – boys and girls.

    By voting for NActMU this year they will be wielding the hammer themselves.