Opinions / THE CONSERVATORY
recent Opinions/THE CONSERVATORY
by Edward Greig | 2:47 am, 20/09/2010
Michael Laws leapt in to control the possible story over his apparently scandalous relationship and resulting text messages. His claims of there being political motivation behind the story seem a little odd, though. As Laws is not running for Mayor of Whanganui again, the only person with political motivation I can see is from Laws himself. Seeking to gain maximum exposure, and possibly gain some sympathy, Laws may have reached the point of no return in the belief no publicity is bad publicity.
by Edward Greig | 2:15 am, 23/08/2010
An increase in regulations promoting warmer houses may be populist, but it isn’t necessarily good for everyone, nor is government support actually needed for good housing.
by Edward Greig | 11:28 pm, 22/08/2010
Weeks like this don’t come often enough between elections. By now, Chris Carter will probably be gone from the Labour Party, and it’s certain that he signed the death warrant in his own handwriting.
by Edward Greig | 2:05 am, 09/08/2010
Writing from the past, I can’t determine the full fall-out and final result, but for now I am celebrating the recent OUSA referendum result.
by Edward Greig | 1:21 am, 26/07/2010
Following their investment of settlement funds and businesses, iwi are becoming economic powerhouses. It is time that the government recognised this and took advantage of this large pool of capital.
THE CONSERVATORY - 01
by Edward Greig | 2:24 am 24/05/2010
John Key has recently been getting flack for suggesting that some students are taking advantage of the generosity of the taxpayer. The reaction has been a little over-the-top, and his statements framed as an attack on students. Most students do work hard, and some deserve more support than they get. But there are also those who see tertiary education as a way to mess around on someone else’s chequebook.
Masses of students are about to arrive at university this week, many away from home for the first time. Are they all here to study and better themselves, their education, and their job prospects, or have some have come to escape home, avoid responsibility, and run riot? Of course, there is nothing wrong with that, but it does become a problem when you call on the generosity of the wider public, via the government, to fund it. Some of the less focused will pick up their act after the first year; however, some will drop out, continue to fail, and waste space and money.
Seeing the student living allowance as a subsistence benefit is problematic. Supporting a student costs the Government a lot. They are also paying for tuition costs (more than the amount loaned, as there is already a significant subsidy for NZ students). That is money that could be used to fund tertiary education in other ways than paying the course costs of failures.
Targeting money to students who want to learn and will increase the intellectual capital of New Zealand should be the aim of supporting students. Providing funding for research and education will increase our national knowledge and create a ‘smart economy’. Throwing it down a black hole to allow anyone to scrape through for as long as they want is a waste.
Before anyone calls for substantial living allowance for all, those who would get it need to be seriously reconsidered. Many deserve it, but some are draining the universities, the taxpayers and our reputations as students. There should be no concern at cutting off those who are unwilling to make the most of what they get and put in some effort themselves.
True open entry to tertiary education does not require funding those who will not try. Giving everyone a chance to have a go is important. But letting the lazy few borrow indefinitely is not going to help anyone.
comments are disabled for this article
