The Act Party's putting the pressure on Auckland University to say goodbye to its compulsory ‘Waipapa Taumata Rau’ course.
The near $6 thousand paper covers the Treaty of Waitangi and traditional Māori tikanga for first year students.
Leader David Seymour told Mike Hosking students within his Epsom electorate are upset.
He says constituents have told him they aren't interested in the course and view it as a perversion of academic freedom.
The university says the course offers core knowledge and skills to help transition students into tertiary reduction, and set them up for success.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
More moraification issues to deal with. I told you earlier
this week about the requirements around TA tyranny for pharmacists.
Now Aukland University's new invented program this is the way
pathatalmuta raw International students are being made to do this.
It's mandatory and they will charge you five seven hundred
and thirty dollars for the pleasure. Now the athlete David
Seymour is back with us. Very good morning.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Hey, good morning mate.
Speaker 1 (00:22):
So we talked to Penny Simmons about this, may have
even talked to you about it in the last year
or so once it came to our attention because of
children in that particular establishment. But she said, and I
think you said at the time, they're independent. They can
do what they like, can't they.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Well, there is an element of truth in that, and
I think a lot of the frustrations that people have,
including me, with different institutions that haven't quite got the
memo that the people changed the government is that they
are subject to the law as is ultimate leader government.
So in the case of the University of Auckland, they
have a council, they have the ultimate say what we
(00:57):
can do. As a point better people, but also publicly
maker views. No, and I certainly intend to be doing
that because I've had so many constituents in the EPSOM
electorate who are students and they're just saying, this is
not only not of interest to us, but more importantly,
it's a perversion of academic freedom. This particular course is
(01:20):
quite different from other stuff that happens at the university.
Usually students can choose their own electives. There's no course
that's absolutely compulsory across the whole university, and usually professors
are free to criticize the course material. This is quite different.
It's actually a form of indoctrination because it's largely being
(01:41):
taught by people outside of particular faculty for frankly political
purposes rather than educational exactly.
Speaker 1 (01:49):
Now, the difficulty is and you viihlate it at university
and they take a paper off you. In other words,
because you have to do that paper, you are doing
one less paper of your choice, which is what university
is all about. Can you, though, despite what you said,
literally do anything about it.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
What we can do is appoint new council members. Will
be doing that. Unfortunately, I think only one comes up
this year, but we can also I think, lead opinion
or at least reflect the opinion that we're feeling, so
that people on the campus have the ability to say, actually,
we don't agree with this, our government doesn't agree with this,
(02:26):
MYA and P doesn't agree with this. We should be
able to speak up and say no to it. That's
part of I know that's what you might call soft power,
but I still think it's important.
Speaker 1 (02:37):
Is part of it? Could it? I mean one of
two things are going to happen. Either the other universities
are going to go, oh cool, we'll get into this
as well, and then we're truly stuffed, or international students
or students generally can go look to other universities and go, well,
they don't do it. I'll go there is there a
bit of that about it.
Speaker 2 (02:53):
Well, Unfortunately, what I'm hearing is a lot of people
is particually in the electorate I represent and now looking
at overseas universities because they feel unable to speak up
against these things, and yet they also know it's not
the best for their future. I have to say. One
of the purposes of the Treaty Principles fell was to
define the principles of the treaty as treating everybody equally
(03:14):
in this country. And the purpose of that is to
allow people to tap on the sign. And you say,
you say you have to do this because of the
principles of the treaty. No, you don't here they are. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (03:24):
Did you read the spin off story by miss Smith,
who sat there for most of the eighty hours?
Speaker 2 (03:30):
I did not read. I do read the Spinoff sometimes,
but I usually you.
Speaker 1 (03:34):
Should read it fifty taker. It's her fifty things she learned,
and she was one of the few who was there
for the whole time, along with Mary Television. And what
she got out of it, and this is a very
left leaning sort of operation. What she got out of it, though,
and I thought was really instructive, was that no one agrees.
So you can have every expert in the world that goes, no,
what David Seymore is doing is dangerous and or know
(03:55):
what David Seymore's doing is right, so they agree to disagree.
And these are learned, studied, intelligent, articulate people. So what
you're trying to do, which is to you know, here
it is once and for all, is the right thing.
I mean, that's what came out of the hearings if
you listened to them all.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
Yeah, And I don't want to relitigate all the politics. Obviously,
I'm disappointed that my partners and government don't want to
carry this thing on. But what it will do is
leave a line in the sand where people in the
future will be able to stay hang on. There's been
an attempt to define the principles of the treaty as
making all Dewey's equal. There haven't been any strong arguments
(04:34):
against it. And I believe that in the future, maybe me,
maybe somebody else will pick this up, and we will
be a much better country when we interpret our founding
document as giving each of us equal rights. Right.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
I got sidetracked there by what you said. Sorry pharmacists,
which was the other thing this week with the Tatuti thing.
Eighty five percent of pharmacists are short of staff. I
read the list out on air, and we wonder why
pharmacists don't come into the country. Why haven't you fixed that?
By the way, a year and a half in, why
haven't you fixed it?
Speaker 2 (05:05):
Well again, I don't want to sound like we're trying
to avoid the issue, but I just want to explain
what we're doing and what the constraints are. This was
done back in June twenty twenty three. It comes into
effect on April first this year. This is these new
criteria for being a pharmacist qualified in New Zealand. Our
(05:26):
main power over the Pharmacy Council is to appoint the council.
I happen to be responsible for doing that. I got
a paper through from the Ministry of Health about two
months ago that said, here's all the usual suspects that
we think you should appoint. I had to look at
these names. I noticed that they'd mostly been recommended by
(05:46):
these various so called population agencies, the Ministry for Pacific
People and the Ministry for Women and TPK and Ministry
for Ethnic Affairs and so on. And I looked at
it and I thought, no, no, no, no. So what
I've done, as I've said, we're putting a hold on
the reappointments. I've put an article in Pharmacy Today that
basically says, if you're a pharmacist who loves pharmacy and
(06:08):
wants excellence in the profession, then please put your name forward.
And I expect to ap point five of the eight
people who were previously appointed by Labor will be putting
in people who've actually got their eyes on the price
of a world leading pharmacy profession that's the best at
what they do, rather than a kind of cultural indoctrination.
Speaker 1 (06:29):
Good sooner, the better, appreciate time, Have a good weekend.
David Seymour, act leader.
Speaker 2 (06:33):
For more from the Mic Asking Breakfast, listen live to
news talks. It'd be from six am weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.
More moraification issues to deal with. I told you earlier
this week about the requirements around TA tyranny for pharmacists.
Now Aukland University's new invented program this is the way
pathatalmuta raw International students are being made to do this.
It's mandatory and they will charge you five seven hundred
and thirty dollars for the pleasure. Now the athlete David
Seymour is back with us. Very good morning.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Hey, good morning mate.
Speaker 1 (00:22):
So we talked to Penny Simmons about this, may have
even talked to you about it in the last year
or so once it came to our attention because of
children in that particular establishment. But she said, and I
think you said at the time, they're independent. They can
do what they like, can't they.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Well, there is an element of truth in that, and
I think a lot of the frustrations that people have,
including me, with different institutions that haven't quite got the
memo that the people changed the government is that they
are subject to the law as is ultimate leader government.
So in the case of the University of Auckland, they
have a council, they have the ultimate say what we
(00:57):
can do. As a point better people, but also publicly
maker views. No, and I certainly intend to be doing
that because I've had so many constituents in the EPSOM
electorate who are students and they're just saying, this is
not only not of interest to us, but more importantly,
it's a perversion of academic freedom. This particular course is
(01:20):
quite different from other stuff that happens at the university.
Usually students can choose their own electives. There's no course
that's absolutely compulsory across the whole university, and usually professors
are free to criticize the course material. This is quite different.
It's actually a form of indoctrination because it's largely being
(01:41):
taught by people outside of particular faculty for frankly political
purposes rather than educational exactly.
Speaker 1 (01:49):
Now, the difficulty is and you viihlate it at university
and they take a paper off you. In other words,
because you have to do that paper, you are doing
one less paper of your choice, which is what university
is all about. Can you, though, despite what you said,
literally do anything about it.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
What we can do is appoint new council members. Will
be doing that. Unfortunately, I think only one comes up
this year, but we can also I think, lead opinion
or at least reflect the opinion that we're feeling, so
that people on the campus have the ability to say, actually,
we don't agree with this, our government doesn't agree with this,
(02:26):
MYA and P doesn't agree with this. We should be
able to speak up and say no to it. That's
part of I know that's what you might call soft power,
but I still think it's important.
Speaker 1 (02:37):
Is part of it? Could it? I mean one of
two things are going to happen. Either the other universities
are going to go, oh cool, we'll get into this
as well, and then we're truly stuffed, or international students
or students generally can go look to other universities and go, well,
they don't do it. I'll go there is there a
bit of that about it.
Speaker 2 (02:53):
Well, Unfortunately, what I'm hearing is a lot of people
is particually in the electorate I represent and now looking
at overseas universities because they feel unable to speak up
against these things, and yet they also know it's not
the best for their future. I have to say. One
of the purposes of the Treaty Principles fell was to
define the principles of the treaty as treating everybody equally
(03:14):
in this country. And the purpose of that is to
allow people to tap on the sign. And you say,
you say you have to do this because of the
principles of the treaty. No, you don't here they are. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (03:24):
Did you read the spin off story by miss Smith,
who sat there for most of the eighty hours?
Speaker 2 (03:30):
I did not read. I do read the Spinoff sometimes,
but I usually you.
Speaker 1 (03:34):
Should read it fifty taker. It's her fifty things she learned,
and she was one of the few who was there
for the whole time, along with Mary Television. And what
she got out of it, and this is a very
left leaning sort of operation. What she got out of it, though,
and I thought was really instructive, was that no one agrees.
So you can have every expert in the world that goes, no,
what David Seymore is doing is dangerous and or know
(03:55):
what David Seymore's doing is right, so they agree to disagree.
And these are learned, studied, intelligent, articulate people. So what
you're trying to do, which is to you know, here
it is once and for all, is the right thing.
I mean, that's what came out of the hearings if
you listened to them all.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
Yeah, And I don't want to relitigate all the politics. Obviously,
I'm disappointed that my partners and government don't want to
carry this thing on. But what it will do is
leave a line in the sand where people in the
future will be able to stay hang on. There's been
an attempt to define the principles of the treaty as
making all Dewey's equal. There haven't been any strong arguments
(04:34):
against it. And I believe that in the future, maybe me,
maybe somebody else will pick this up, and we will
be a much better country when we interpret our founding
document as giving each of us equal rights. Right.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
I got sidetracked there by what you said. Sorry pharmacists,
which was the other thing this week with the Tatuti thing.
Eighty five percent of pharmacists are short of staff. I
read the list out on air, and we wonder why
pharmacists don't come into the country. Why haven't you fixed that?
By the way, a year and a half in, why
haven't you fixed it?
Speaker 2 (05:05):
Well again, I don't want to sound like we're trying
to avoid the issue, but I just want to explain
what we're doing and what the constraints are. This was
done back in June twenty twenty three. It comes into
effect on April first this year. This is these new
criteria for being a pharmacist qualified in New Zealand. Our
(05:26):
main power over the Pharmacy Council is to appoint the council.
I happen to be responsible for doing that. I got
a paper through from the Ministry of Health about two
months ago that said, here's all the usual suspects that
we think you should appoint. I had to look at
these names. I noticed that they'd mostly been recommended by
(05:46):
these various so called population agencies, the Ministry for Pacific
People and the Ministry for Women and TPK and Ministry
for Ethnic Affairs and so on. And I looked at
it and I thought, no, no, no, no. So what
I've done, as I've said, we're putting a hold on
the reappointments. I've put an article in Pharmacy Today that
basically says, if you're a pharmacist who loves pharmacy and
(06:08):
wants excellence in the profession, then please put your name forward.
And I expect to ap point five of the eight
people who were previously appointed by Labor will be putting
in people who've actually got their eyes on the price
of a world leading pharmacy profession that's the best at
what they do, rather than a kind of cultural indoctrination.
Speaker 1 (06:29):
Good sooner, the better, appreciate time, Have a good weekend.
David Seymour, act leader.
Speaker 2 (06:33):
For more from the Mic Asking Breakfast, listen live to
news talks. It'd be from six am weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Intentionally Disturbing
Join me on this podcast as I navigate the murky waters of human behavior, current events, and personal anecdotes through in-depth interviews with incredible people—all served with a generous helping of sarcasm and satire. After years as a forensic and clinical psychologist, I offer a unique interview style and a low tolerance for bullshit, quickly steering conversations toward depth and darkness. I honor the seriousness while also appreciating wit. I’m your guide through the twisted labyrinth of the human psyche, armed with dark humor and biting wit.