Uproar over plan for new school

Efforts by the South Hokianga community of Whirinaki to persuade the Ministry of Education to abandon its plan to move Te Kura Kaupapa Maori o Te Tonga o Hokianga from Whirinaki some seven kilometres, to a new site at Koutu Point, have so far made no impression.

The community has argued since 2010, when the Koutu site was chosen, that it would be a backward step for every conceivable reason, including physical, social, educational and financial.

A further missive to Education Minister Hekia Parata following a public meeting in November last year claimed that the community's solution to the issues that were behind the move would cost $689,000, as opposed to the $9.6 million needed to build a new school.

The issue has its genesis in a decision made in 2009 to grant the school wharekura status, which would enable it to teach through to Year 13. That decision also entitled it to additional accommodation and specialist classrooms, and in November 2010 the Koutu Point site was chosen.

There were also issues regarding tenure of the existing site and the condition of the land.

The impasse was summarised by Diana Ellis, from the Opononi/Omapere Ratepayers' Association.

"The Ministry of Education is wanting to shift a school from a predominantly Maori community with roughly 80 residents and around 25 children attending the school to a rural coastal zone made up of holiday baches with around 45 permanent residents, most of them retired, and one child attending the school," she said.

"This shift is to increase the school roll by 100 pupils at a cost of around $10 million-plus, we have estimated."

The ratepayers' association has long been complaining to the Minister and others, but claims they all have missed the point entirely. Association chairman Peter Oldham wrote to the Minister again last month, asking why, at a time of economic stress, money was to be spent on relocating a school to an area that had no connection with the school and against the wishes of many of the parents.

"Why was $866,000 spent purchasing land which is clearly not suitable without any community consultation?" he asked.

"Why is the availability of land at Opononi Area School not being looked at? This school has a declining roll and buildings are being removed. A separate campus could easily be installed in an area serviced by all facilities.

"There are other schools in the area, such as Omanaia, which is also struggling, which could be converted to a kura."

The philosophy behind kura kaupapa could be maintained even if land was shared with another school, unless isolating pupils from mainstream education was being practised as a form of apartheid.

"We maintain this is a gross misdirection of education funding when financial resources are being strained and against the very principles you are using to amalgamate and reduce the number of schools in other parts of the country," Mr Oldham concluded.

Meanwhile a South Hokianga land owner, who did not wish to be identified, claimed that the new school would be built on limestone, which would not provide adequate soakage for sewage. The site was just "feet" from the Hokianga Harbour, but there was no marine specialist report on the impact sewage would have on the harbour. Allowance had been made for three cubic metres of effluent per day, which he suspected would prove to be conservative for a school with 200 pupils.

All the facilities needed, including a large hall and a swimming pool, were available at Opononi Area School.

"There was no community consultation prior to the purchase of the land [at Koutu Point] and the commitment to build the school, regardless of majority local opposition to the proposal, which I thought was a fundamental right in a democracy, and a principle which should be the cornerstone of the country's constitution," he added.