Learning the right lessons

All American students are required to learn about the US Constitution and the War of Independence; for the French, it’s the significance of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic era. Even Australian students learn about their convict origins. I am gobsmacked that in bi-cultural NZ (with the Treaty of Waitangi our foundational document), a student can potentially go through our schooling system without learning about our colonial history, and the context of the Treaty of Waitangi.

The NZ Curriculum, in my opinion, gives too much freedom to schools and teachers to exclude the teaching of NZ history. I support the NZ History Teachers’ Association’s petition for a coherent teaching of our colonial history. (TDN, Feb 6, ‘‘History? Who Needs It?’’).

The NZHTA, in regard to the teaching of the Treaty of Waitangi, is not advocating for a national story — rather, they want multiple views to be considered, which will engender empathy and debate, plus develop critical thinking.

As an aside, I agree wholeheartedly with Lance Girling-Butcher’s recent opinion piece, that Marshland Hill urgently needs better maintenance, and his advocacy for erecting a memorial to fallen Ma¯ ori who were killed defending their land during the land wars. Such a monument would certainly balance things. Because the prominent monument there(where the soldier was vandalised and removed) pays tribute to the loyal Ma¯ ori (kupapa) who supported the Crown in their fight against the rebellious Ma¯ ori in the land wars.

Bryan Vickery New Plymouth

I can’t find any noble democratic sentiments behind our 5G decision.

Letters

Way back during the 1996 election campaign, I remember hearing Winston Peters speak. At the time, he had Labour’s hapless Ma¯ ori MPs in his sights. ‘‘They are lions on the marae,’’ boomed Winston to his adoring followers, ‘‘but when they get into Parliament, they go quiet. They become lambs. Lions on the marae; lambs in Parliament!’’ The crowd loved it and that year New Zealand First entered government as well as cleaning up the five Ma¯ ori seats.

The lion-hearted Peters was in similar combative mood when he delivered a speech in Washington recently, which hadn’t been checked by his form teacher, Jacinda Ardern.

Peters wanted to ‘‘enlist greater US support’’ in the Pacific. He loudly worried that the region is ‘‘becoming more contested and its security is ever more fragile. We unashamedly ask the United States to engage more’’ .

Winston the Lionheart temporarily ignored how terrified most New Zealanders would become if Donald Trump stopped playing golf for a few moments, engaged more, and found out where our country actually is.

Apparently New Zealanders are also ‘‘archly concerned by the asymmetries at play in the region at a time when larger players are renewing their interest in the Pacific with an attendant level of strategic competition’’.

‘‘Larger players’’? Who could Peters possibly mean? Tokelau? Tuvalu? Surely not our good friends China? Of all the barbecues I’ve attended this summer, I haven’t met one person ‘‘archly concerned by the asymmetries at play in the Pacific’’. Most have been archly concerned about a) the heat b) bush fires c) house rental prices d) the loudness of cicadas e) freedom campers f) lime scooters, and g) the possibility of coach Mark Rudan leaving the Phoenix.

When Peters spoke at a parliamentary event to celebrate Chinese New Year on February 14, with the Chinese ambassador present, I wondered if his lion-like, anti-Chinese rhetoric would turn the gathering into a Valentines Day massacre.

Yet Winston was so lamb-like you could get a Chinese tourist to feed him a bottle then turn him into a pair of lambskin slippers. ‘‘China matters to New Zealand,’’ baa-ed Mr Peters. ‘‘We have