Surely many of us have felt grave concern at how people of Ma¯ ori and Pasifika ethnicity (even if it's only a small fraction in the person concerned) can be accepted for some university courses with lower NCEA Level 3 marks than all other new students must have. I don't think we would feel very confident about consulting a professional who is of that ethnicity, even though he/she had the appropriate qualification.
The point would still be, just how well did he/she pass the final exams for it?
Leaving out the matter of ethnicity, there is surely a much higher chance that a student who enters on those easier terms will flunk out or voluntarily drop out at some stage of a long and tough course. Also that, even if he/she passes the finals to qualify, it will very likely be just a scrape-through pass and not a brilliant one.
From the viewpoint of a professional
person's patient or client, this could have very serious consequences - I don't need to spell out what they might be.
I wonder whether there are any official statistics that would tell us the facts about how many of the flunk-outs and drop-outs were those who began the course on that privileged basis, and perhaps also statistics of how well, if they got through the final exams, what their marks were. But my guess is that, even if such statistics exist, our authorities would be very reluctant to release them to us.
Even if we leave out the facts about those students who finally qualify, there is likely to be a large waste of taxpayers' money on the flunk-outs and drop-outs, so this would embarrass the powers that be if it became public knowledge.
H WESTFOLD WELLINGTON grease. Most iwi, throughout the land, have been successfully producing squeaky wheels for a long time.
The bountiful sum of $80 million, approved by Jacinda Ardern for northern Ma¯ ori, is an example, as are the exclusive funds for health, education, social welfare, and the large sums that were granted to iwi to make claims for control of the coastline.
No funds were made available to the general public to challenge the legality of the claims.
They are doing well with the multimillions spent on promoting te reo, as it now, with three per cent national speakers, takes precedence in official signage over English, with 20 per cent internationally, and still they keep on squeaking.
It is difficult to accept logically that a citizen with one-sixteenth Ma¯ ori blood should have special exclusive advantages over a citizen of onesixteenth Scottish ancestry. Fifteensixteenths of the part-Ma¯ ori's forebears were possibly colonists.
We should all identify primarily as New Zealanders and share equally the bounty of this great land, and stop squeaking for a larger share.
These claims are not against Ma¯ ori but against divisive, avaricious national practices. BRYAN JOHNSON
Omokoroa and climate science denial, that are party to the spreading of disinformation.
This is evident by Mr Jones’ use of misleading arguments, which don't stack up to the mountain of real evidence. Obviously he is not familiar with the greenhouse effect and the role carbon represents. This is simple, basic science.
It is not about left wing politics, or suggesting anthropogenic global warming as an alarmist cult.
These suggestions are just a couple of examples of deliberately fabricating fake controversies. Much more can be found in the misuse of data.
To become better informed on the subject, reading up through Wikipedia is a good start. Katharine Hayhoe, a climate scientist, and her husband, an evangelical Christian, both see the urgency that we have to act now to drastically reduce our carbon footprint. Her videos on you tube are well worth watching. RAY PATERSON