Unequal funding for Te Papa national disgrace

Paul Little was on to something when he opened his column by questioning Te Papa’s status as the “national” gallery, while marvelling that Auckland Art Gallery, with its superior display, was limping along on 25 per cent less public funding than five years ago (Why does Motat beat gallery? January 28). But then he analysed the use of our rates money, rather than looking at how the money Aucklanders pay in tax is spent in funding the arts. The reality is that we subsidise Wellington to a ridiculous extent, with its museum/gallery receiving $30 million a year in operational funding from central Government, while equivalent institutions get $0. Basically, we pay twice for a museum and art gallery. Te Papa has no more claim to being “national” than our gallery and museum, and hundreds of thousands of Aucklanders cannot afford to visit it. Our Mayor and Prime Minister would do well to address this anomaly and direct funding to where the most people are, not the most politicians.

Tony Waring, Grey Lynn

Heather du Plessis-Allan’s statement that “the Government actively suppressed Te Reo Ma¯ori, often by beating it out of kids at school” (Minding our language, January 28) is a gross distortion of the facts. World War II had just ended when I was appointed to a Native, later named Ma¯ori, School. On my second day I was visited by an elderly lady who came quickly to the point: “You teach him the English, never mind the Ma¯ori. If he play up, I fix him!” This attitude to her grandson’s schooling was shared by most parents. Young men of the Ma¯ori Battalion who survived the war were clear as to their children’s future. Higher education was a priority and Native School authorities were persuaded to have more pupils gain Ma¯ori College scholarships. A reasonable standard of English was required for a