Category Archives: Opinion

National Standards: The Great March To Mediocrity

Posted on by
2

The principal at my twelve year old son’s school wrote to parents this week illuminating her media reported comments in relation to the recently published “league tables” of school performance under the government’s misguided “National Standards” programme. Whilst generally supporting the inclusion of a standards based system within the school, the nationwide implementation of the programme has not been uniform, she explained. Consequently output data should not be regarded as reliable, because of differences in methodology across the country. That’s a diplomatic position to adopt, when you have a gun to your head.

Publishing “league tables” is a self-defeating exercise, I’m sure you will agree. But the media never lets facts get in the way of a good headline. There’s something about the way this whole issue has unfolded that makes me wonder what the real agenda is here. Even the title “national standards” is laced with threatening overtones, suggesting a march towards conformity and mindless mediocrity. But there is seemingly very little us concerned parents can do about it now. Typically, the media have chosen not to focus on the more important sociological questions around this issue. I guess teachers and principals just have to suck it up as well, even though many must find the foundational political ideology abhorrent.

The principal’s comments confirm what most intelligent observers already knew. National “standards” (or whatever variant is being used) are entirely subjective and can only possibly give a very approximate indication of where a child sits in relation to his peers. Who dreams this stuff up? Furthermore, because the focus seems to be on “meeting the standard”, rather than excelling, the entire exercise can only ever lead to academic mediocrity. This seems entirely contrary to fulfilling aspirations for better outcomes in key areas such as mathematics and sciences, which will underpin New Zealand’s economic development in the future.

I’m confident my child will succeed in spite of the vast amount of resources being wasted on this folly, so I’m not particularly concerned by what position the school takes. To be quite honest, I think we should instead be paying more attention to nurturing our childrens’ broader social, physical and intellectual development at this age, rather than trying to create a socially divisive and wholly artificial benchmark.

Yes, we parents are sitting up in class and paying attention. Will it make any difference now? Probably not. Even if there is a change of government next year, I doubt that National Standards will be entirely rolled back. Mandarins within the Ministry will see to that. Perhaps we should instead focus our energies on the really big battle looming, as foreshadowed by the merger plans outlined for schools in Christchurch. My child is the third generation in our family to proudly attend an intermediate school. I hope he won’t be the last.

Aussie Rules?

Posted on by
Reply

My annual escape to the West Island always provides plenty of food for thought and this visit has been no exception. Australia is a nation of rule makers, a trait complicated by the fact that there are both federal laws and those laid down by state governments – and they sometimes do not align comfortably.

Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard is under seige at present after ushering in new taxation regimes aimed at redressing both climate change and mineral exploitation rights. The Minerals Resource Rent Tax takes a small percentage of the billions of dollars of profits generated from mineral extraction and redirects it towards infrastructure projects and social needs. It’s a brave effort in wealth redistribution by a government with a wafer thin parliamentary majority. The new Carbon Tax creates an impost on the 500 largest polluters in the “Lucky Country” and will largely be passed on to consumers, although it will be rebalanced to a large degree by tax reductions for small business and low income earners.

In a bizarre move, the Queensland State government is in the process of taking the federal government to court, to oppose the resource tax. Queensland has been one of the biggest beneficiaries of the infrastructure spend up that has helped keep the Australian economy bouyant throughout the GFC. The Sunshine State is brimming over with new roads, bridges and public amenities such as the $2 billion regional hospital construction about to get underway north of Brisbane.

Opposition leader Tony Abbott is reveling in the negative media attention, with an election looming next year however. It’s payback time after being narrowly defeated at the polls last time around and therein lies the worry. Abbott is a conservative, former Catholic seminary student turned political hack, famous for rolling his predecessor in protest against his own party supporting a carbon emissions trading scheme. Abbott has a short fuse and a penchant for firing up the red-neck right. He recently called foreign asylum seeking boat people “un-Christian” for immigrant queue jumping and wants the Navy to turn back boats on the high seas by force ( a position that reportedly horrifies senior military analysts). His latest gaffe was to elevate the New Zealand government as a shining example of economic management, when all our performance indicators in fact remain below that of Australia’s.

It remains to be seen who will be making Aussie’s rules after the election in 2013. Whatever the outcome, we should take note of Gillard’s formula for addressing social and environmental concerns in the context of Australia’s windfall from the minerals boom. Our own government has recently backed away from acting likewise in terms of our wealth-creating but polluting commodity based primary industries. Perhaps we should review that stance in light of Australia’s approach.

Shifting The Economic Goalposts

Posted on by
2

Economist Brian Gaynor’s recent article on why we will never “catch up” to Australia was another sobering reminder of the hard road that New Zealand has ahead. Invoking a sporting analogy by beating Australia may be a popular rally to arms, but it focuses public attention on completely the wrong set of goalposts.

Another sobering occasion was when we sadly learned of the passing of Sir Paul Callaghan, one of New Zealand’s most passionate science communicators and technology entrepreneurs. Sir Paul lived every moment and notably even turned his cancer treatment regime into an experiment. More importantly he was one of the most ardent promoters of science and technology commercialisation as a means of growing New Zealand’s economy.

“Sir Paul was a true public intellectual who earned the respect of everyone, including those who disagreed with him”, stated the government’s sternly worded Ministerial press release reporting news of Sir Paul’s death. Curiously, outside of Cabinet, I can’t name a single (intelligent) person who actually disagreed with his thesis that New Zealand urgently needs to ramp up economic growth through more investment in research, science and technology commercialisation, rather than continuing with an over-reliance on flogging unprocessed, environmentally unsustainable dairy commodities to the world.

To its credit, the government has finally moved to increase research funding and there are more frequent mutterings along the lines of “doing something” about uncovering intellectual property locked up within our many publicly funded institutions. But those of us who looked on frustrated over the last decade as the “Knowledge Wave” withered on the vine, are becoming more and more concerned that the opportunity to fully promote science and technology as an economic driver is disappearing.

Beyond pumping more cash into research, we need a huge cultural shift involving both governmental agencies and the public mindset. As clean-tech entrepreneur Nick Gerritsen stated at a recent seminar, “we need more millionaire scientists and fewer millionaire sportsmen”. With the loss of Professor Callaghan, I’m left wondering who will be brave enough to pick up the mantle.

You can follow the author on Twitter @GeniusNet

Attacks On Economic Agency Unfair

Posted on by
Reply

Grow Wellington may have failed to trumpet its successes loudly enough, but it doesn’t deserve the criticism that is currently being heaped upon it as the seriously flawed Wellington regional economic strategy (WRS) has undergone review. The economic development agency has done a relatively good job of making a silk purse out of a sow’s ear within a recessionary environment in which the central government focus has been on other parts of the country.

It beggars belief that plans are afoot to abscond with $600K of the agency’s annual budget to fund the WRS office to “administer” the strategy. It’s not clear how creating another layer of bureaucracy will enhance the region’s economic performance however. Past complaints by the Wellington Chamber of Commerce demonstrate a deep ignorance of the outstanding network building and facilitation work that Grow Wellington has undertaken and the cheap attacks look like nothing more than a desperate attempt by the Chamber to remain relevant.

Last year’s Rugby World Cup was a pleasant distraction for some, but an economic fizzer for the region overall, as predicted by every study looking at the long term value of such large scale events. But sound academic research and global best practice has never been the basis for the regional economic strategy, a document that was prepared by local management consultants. At no time did the strategy charge Grow Wellington with researching and advocating on regional infrastructure and accordingly the organisation does not employ researchers or economists. One would have thought this was in fact the Chamber’s role, hence their criticism should be directed inwards.

Wellington needs better public transport, an infusion of entrepreneurial culture plus more and ongoing investment into productive and high value parts of the economy, including facilitating foreign capital. On the other side of the ledger, we also need to preserve the quality of life that we currently enjoy because this is the basis for skilled migrant attraction. Look around – at least half of the technology start-ups in the region have been created by recent arrivals. That is an economic success story that should be told far more often.

You can follow the author on Twitter @GeniusNet

Mega Takedown

Posted on by
Reply

The Coatesville police raid and subsequent removal of the MegaUpload site should serve as a reminder to us all about how powerful governments and corporations now intend to exercise increasing control of the wild west known as the Internet, through both new legislation and legal prosecutions. It would also be foolish to continue assuming that tiny, remote New Zealand is immune from the growing American political appetite for punishing the alleged purveyors (and consumers) of pirated material.

Irrespective of what you think about Mr Dotcom and the legitimacy of his business, it’s important that the matter be given due process through the Courts and that we do not prejudge the outcome or bow unthinkingly to the will of foreign governments. There are powerful forces at work as witnessed recently with the U.S. senate coming under heavy lobbying pressure from the entertainment industry.

It’s clear that our government want to be cooperative, especially with increasingly frequent connections being made between favourable trade outcomes and the protection of intellectual property rights for American companies. What better place to exercise a show of force than in a small, compliant island state in the south-west Pacific. Why else would such an over-the-top para-military style operation be permitted in the Prime Minister’s own electorate on an individual who had recently received approval for New Zealand residency? It’s astounding.

The SOPA debate and the moral panic around piracy in the United States has largely arisen because of the ongoing failure of the media and entertainment industry to innovate its distribution channels rapidly enough. The rise of file sharing and related sites is simply a symptom of that failure in the marketplace. Without question, creative individuals deserve to be fairly remunerated for their efforts and creative industries should be allowed to make a profit, but not at the expense of Internet freedom.

Police raids and draconian legislation are ultimately more likely to inflame than to discourage. An intolerant approach towards content sharing enterprises in general may also have unintended consequences for “law abiding” users caught up in crackdowns. Perhaps the hackers and hosters should be invited to provide a technological solution to the digital creative sector that everyone can live with?

 

Building Our Innovation Ecosystem

Posted on by
Reply

Innovation, incubation and competitiveness are firmly back on the political agenda. 2011 has been a busy year, with the government setting about reforming publicly funded scientific research and reconfiguring IRL in an effort to drive more commercialisation activity in the technology sector. The government funded trade agency has also been talking up successes from its incubator programme. In the meantime, the recently formed Productivity Commission has quietly begun developing an academic framework to address infrastructural inefficiencies in the New Zealand economy.

In this context, it was unsurprising to see some recent commentary that was highly critical of the manner in which government gets involved in innovation and business. More specifically, Rowan’s comments alluded to some deficiencies in the methodologies being employed by business incubators when advising software start-ups. Notwithstanding the fact that incubators are generalists and lack the huge depth of experience and background of success that Rowan brings to his own web and software ventures, there were some fair criticisms which pleasingly generated a lot of intelligent follow-up discussion.

Where I parted company with this debate however was when the tone shifted towards questioning the necessity for providing events to engage the start-up community. Most readers will be aware that I’m deeply involved in organising such activities in addition to my role as a co-founder of a couple of tech companies. One of these companies is pre-revenue start-up, the other is growth phase and profitable. Being involved in the community is a deliberate strategy which is partly altruistic (because it’s fun), but also good for business. We are only as strong as the people around us.

The government’s moves to redefine how we approach identifying and commercialising high value science and technology based ventures are oxygen for our economic flame; so too are the various contributions made by formal incubators, informal “innovation hubs”, university commercialisation offices and the various business related events and competitions. The Ministry of Science & Innovation’s report on Powering Innovation even talks about “…the creative connection of talented minds across discipline boundaries“. We do not need to emulate Silicon Valley, but we should learn from that ecosystem model.

Around the world, entrepreneurship is increasingly seen as both a legitimate career option for young people and a growth spark in an otherwise dull economy. At a time when youth unemployment stands at around 30% in New Zealand, we cannot afford to ignore the opportunity of infusing young people with an entrepreneurial spirit. I recently attended the 30th anniversary celebration of the Young Enterprise Trust. This organisation provides entrepreneurship programmes for high schools and counts such luminaries as Rod Drury and Seeby Woodhouse amongst its alumni, demonstrating the importance of a community approach to entrepreneurship education.

Building an entrepreneurial and export focused culture has never been so important as now, with traditional models breaking down faster than ever. Knowledge sharing and relationship building within and amongst our specialist communities is foundational to strengthening our innovation ecosystem. We can no longer afford to operate in silos or to make the assumption that there is only a single approach to building cool businesses that solve real problems and generate economic returns.

100+ Rewiring The Productive Economy

Posted on by
Reply

We live in interesting times. Last month I attended a seminar looking at productivity in the New Zealand economy and how we can improve. The most overwhelming aspect of the event however was that most of the attendees were white, male and aged 50 or older. Furthermore, much of the focus was on making changes to macroeconomic settings, rather than making an attitudinal shift. If we are to address this issue in a meaningful way we need to engage with a far broader church, including politicians, scientists, entrepreneurs and investors from across the spectrum who are committed to change – not just economists.

With our over-dependence on high volume, low value food commodities to generate income and an over-investment in non productive assets such as property, we have seen per capita income dropping rapidly over the last decade. The flow-on effect has been a return to net outwards migration at levels unseen in the last thirty years. New Zealand is close to entering a death spiral, in terms of an inability to pay for social services in the future, if we don’t fix this right now! Within the next thirty years we will reach a tipping point at which a minority of the population is working to support the dependent majority.

Each speaker at the seminar was tasked with presenting a simple, yet radical idea that could move the goalposts on productivity, in an effort to stem the flow of emigrants and ensure we can fund our future. Some of the ideas were downright batty, but at least people were thinking and talking – which is more than successive governments have achieved so far. In fact, perhaps the single biggest issue is leadership inaction in the face of political expediency. It will take more than speeches and a cup of tea to solve these problems. So here’s my ten cents worth.

It seems we can easily find $10 million to build a temporary booze hall for rugby patrons on Auckland’s waterfront, yet we continue to struggle to provide a coordinated approach to identifying and commercialising world class science in New Zealand. If the government lacks the gumption to look beyond a three year electoral cycle, then the private sector must take a stronger leadership position on the matter.

There’s plenty of cash sloshing around in superannuation funds, but if it means accessing foreign capital and connections to get on with the job, so be it. Endeavour capital see the opportunity, why not others? We should aim for 100+ Lanzatech or Endace type companies. That requires making project opportunities transparent and going big, whilst retaining a NZ Inc. stake in the intellectual property. It means identifying top talent to lead commercialisation. It will also require a complete change of mindset in some of the more conservative knowledge silos around the country.

 

 

 

Where Are We Going?

Posted on by
3

I’ve been trying to make sense lately of an avalanche of economic news and social data that has overtaken us and in particular has implications for the young and disenfranchised worldwide.

On the one hand bankers, politicians and media magnates in suits have got away with crimes that seem only to empower the apparatus of what is looking like an increasingly discredited and ailing economic system. On the other hand looters are venting their anger by targeting the very consumer goods produced by that system. It’s hard to separate the looming economic collapse from the steady erosion of morality across society in general, yet the traditional media at first seem reluctant to make that connection. Perhaps because they are entirely complicit.

Phone tapping and gross invasion of personal privacy were the hallmark of Murdoch’s now discredited tabloids. Perhaps the tattle tale gossip was a tonic aimed squarely at deflecting attention by the masses from the really big issues facing the world? At first glance there may seem to be no connection between double-dipping politicians, eavesdropping media and riots. But England is clearly a nation in crisis on many levels at present and where England goes others in the Eurozone are sure to follow. That has implications for global sentiment, which impacts on small trading nations such as ours.

Now Prime Minister John Key is promoting a poor card for young beneficiaries in an effort to curb welfare dependency and the misappropriation of state funds. Isn’t this precisely the kind of misdirected, pandering politics that brought England to its knees? More importantly, where is the leadership vision that will drive meaningful economic growth, promote education and create jobs for young people instead? There was one good news story however. According to a recent report on the economic cost of failing to invest in early childhood, it turns out we beat Turkey and Mexico in an OECD ranking of social spending in this area. That is simply embarrassing.

Where are we going?

Parting Of The Waters

Posted on by
Reply

Matt McCarten’s piece in the Herald last weekend once again laments the passing of waterfront unionism and 1950s style welfare. But it teaches us nothing at all about the real reasons why the exodus to Australia continues unabated, nor about the real challenge that lies ahead.

Our kids aren’t leaving because welfare got dismantled, nor even because silly old men say dumb things in public sometimes. They are leaving because successive governments of all hues have consistently failed to create and pursue an overriding grand vision that diversifies the NZ economy away from relatively low value agricultural commodities and tourism towards applied science, technology and value added services. They are also leaving because we live in a much more open and global society than the one he longs for.

I agree with McCarten that concerted attempts to lower wages for youth are misguided. We actually need to increase per capita income – across the board. That means creating more opportunities to generate wealth and it means cultivating a highly educated workforce that thrives on such opportunity and has a sense of purpose. We can’t compete on size, so we must compete with our brains and our wit instead.

I believe New Zealand is already at a cross roads. Whilst on the one hand we have recently suffered the worst recession and most devastating natural disaster of our lifetimes, we also exist at a time in history when two huge global economic powerhouses are emerging on our doorstep. Instead of lamenting the loss of skills to Australia, we should be working in close partnership with our western cousins to build global companies that are capable of taking our talent into these developing markets. Parting the waters of the Tasman Sea need not be a negative.

Our children have become the first generation of global citizens that have been digitally connected since birth. It may not matter that they reside in Sydney but commute to an office in Auckland or Shanghai. What matters is that we instill a deep desire to build something that creates value for New Zealand. Kiwis should not be discouraged from going global, they should be emboldened. Next week I’m heading to the Ice Ideas conference. I’m looking forward to being inspired by fellow entrepreneurs who have done exactly that.


Wild About Wellywood

Posted on by
2

Just when we thought common sense had prevailed, the sneering face of Wellington Airport’s Australian born CEO appears in the media to inform us that the hideous and ill-conceived “Wellywood” sign will go ahead after all. Haven’t they got better things to spend their time on?

First it was the turd shaped international terminal, then they wanted to block off a public roadway, now the ridiculous “Wellywood” sign is back on the agenda. It’s clear that Wellington International Airport Limited (WIAL) have no interest in considering public opinion when it comes to their development plans. What is less clear is why 34% shareholder Wellington City Council is not strongly representing the public’s views at board level. Even Mayor Celia Wade Brown admits that the proposed sign is not a suitable reflection of the city.

WIAL management just don’t seem to get it. If you want to market a region as creative and fresh, why would you purloin an overused and derivative icon from an entirely different culture? Furthermore, why would you enflame the public with such a thoughtless and arrogant approach? The “Wellywood” sign concept is so tacky and poorly thought out it beggars belief from those of us who love and value Wellington’s beautiful seascape and are hugely proud of the achievements of all the digital creative industries across the city.

Majority WIAL owner Infratil is currently appealing to our national pride in a bid to encourage more customers to embrace their newly refreshed and wholly Kiwi owned fuel brand “Z”. Yet they seem oblivious to the conflict that is brewing with the airport’s proposal. “Wellywood” says nothing at all about Wellington, it’s not even funny and it certainly sends the wrong message about our ability to be creative. One can only hope that WIAL management will have a change of heart, for I fear a great many people will not take lightly to having their noses rubbed in it.