Neil Quigley denies conflict of interest as Reserve Bank chairman amid Waikato medical school deal
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon announces the new medical school funding. Photo / Mark Mitchell
National had campaigned in 2023 on a new medical school at the university but the promise was diluted through coalition negotiations with Act, which demanded a thorough cost/benefit analysis before committing funding.
Established medical schools claimed funding more placements would be more cost-effective.
Quigley had been heavily involved in the policy development and once described the school as being a 'present' to a National-led Government in a possible second term.
Labour's health spokeswoman Dr Ayesha Verrall said questions should be asked if the deal was a 'you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours' arrangement between Quigley and the Government, given Quigley's role with the Reserve Bank.
'That does draw the independence of the Reserve Bank decisions into question,' she said.
'Releasing the costings for the medical school and how it stacks up against alternative options is important.'
Former Reserve Bank manager Michael Reddell said he wasn't certain a direct conflict existed but questioned whether it explained Quigley's presence on the board.
'It's just a loose connection that no one understands why he's still in the role, why he was reappointed last year.'
Neil Quigley leads the University of Waikato. Photo / George Novak
Luxon, in his post-Cabinet press conference, said he expected any conflicts to be well-managed and felt comfortable with the arrangement.
Quigley's role as chairman was separate to the Monetary Policy Committee, which sets the Official Cash Rate.
Speaking to the Herald, Quigley dismissed the suggestion there was a conflict of interest.
'It's been news to me that people imagined there was a conflict between my role at the Reserve Bank and the university.'
He described the bank as an 'evidence-based institution' and noted he was 'only one of nine members of the board'.
Donations for new school worth 10s of millions
Philanthropic donations had been central to the Government agreeing to co-fund the new medical school, Health Minister Simeon Brown saying donations and university funds would cover the remaining $150m.
The donations had been pledged amid the Government's deliberations with some donors putting pen to paper to commit their contributions.
Quigley wouldn't name any donors, citing privacy, but acknowledged some contributions were worth tens of millions of dollars.
'At the moment, they've done it on a private basis just to support me and we've given the Government an indication of who those people are and what sorts of commitments they've made.'
He said he wasn't aware of any links donors had with the National Party, saying many sought to help address the country's shortage of medical professionals.
'There's a lot of philanthropically-minded people out there and some of them have just come to me and said, 'We want to support this project', it's not as if I've had to go find them.'
Quigley suspected half of the $150m would be satisfied through donations with the rest to be covered by the university.
'At the moment, we're well on the way to the 50% of donations just with a relatively small number of large trusts and very wealthy individuals so we don't see that as particularly challenging.'
Acknowledging comments from Finance Minister Nicola Willis that any extra costs wouldn't be covered by the Government, Quigley said the university was able to borrow any additional funds required.
Early cost estimates for the new school had been much more expensive at about $380m.
Quigley, who described that estimate as 'entirely hypothetical', said costs had been saved through plans to utilise existing health infrastructure like medical centres and GP clinics which weren't at capacity.
Adam Pearse is the Deputy Political Editor and part of the NZ Herald's Press Gallery team based at Parliament in Wellington. He has worked for NZME since 2018, reporting for the Northern Advocate in Whangārei and the Herald in Auckland.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
2 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Letters to the Editor: parties on right, bulldog art, rugby
Today's Letters to the Editor from readers cover topics including parties on the right, opposition to bulldog art and rugby spoiled. Right hand and what the right hand is doing The old cliche that the right hand doesn't know what the left hand's doing, to describe incompetent management, needs a tweak with this coalition government. The right hand doesn't know what the other right hand is doing, or maybe the other. On the National hand we have Minister for Tourism, Louise Upston, touting growth targets of 5 million international visitors a year by 2034, with a majority of those visiting the Queenstown-Lakes District. On the NZ First hand we have Minister for Regional Economic Development, Shane Jones, touting growth targets that involve cratering the landscapes that those visitors come to see and actively enjoy. There is absolutely no sense that this government knows anything about cause and effect, conflicting values, limits to growth, and environmental risk assessment for the future of New Zealanders. Ms Upston and Mr Jones have 10 children between them and several mokopuna. Their future and those of mine depend, not on the bottom line of Australian mining companies or traffic-jamming and sewage drowning in Queenstown, but on caring for our priceless environment whose only bottom line is preservation. Philip Temple Dunedin Thanks, but You were gracious enough to publish my letter regarding this mining venture (18.7.25), where I rebutted two opinions I considered emotive and poorly considered. However, I object to your heading ''Mining is great'' which suggests I am an advocate for this activity at any cost. Mining is never great for any environment. My letter was an attempt to put another view in front of people who do not look at both sides of an argument before committing themselves to a cause. Gavin Dann Alexandra Responsible behaviour Comments by Damian Spring, Santana CEO (ODT 15.7.25), are telling. Mr Spring confirms that they have run an industrial processing plant in ''temporary buildings'' for four or so years without ever applying for consent. The works he now proposes will involve major earthworks, visual amenity impacts, and facilitate traffic volumes for his entire mining workforce of well over 250 people. The non-consented approval path he seeks is a choice to fly under the radar. Not answering the many questions we have posed and lack of any meaningful engagement with the community just confirms this further. It is worth reminding your readers that Santana is a tiny Australian company that has never built an open-cast hard rock mine, and almost entirely relies on external consultants in their development of this project. Questioning its plans and behaviour to date is not only justified, it would be irresponsible not to. Rob van der Mark Sustainable Tarras Community housing Thanks to G. Nicol (Letters ODT 17.7.25) for raising the issue. Those who supported the proposed new community housing build were: Walker, Laufiso, Garey, Benson-Pope, Mayhem and O'Malley. David Benson-Pope Dunedin Dogged opposition I am appalled by the decision to have a mural of a British bulldog. They are badly designed brachiocephalic dogs. They have trouble breathing during exercise because of enlarged uvula and small nostrils. They suffer from heat stress. Many need caesareans to give birth due to the puppies' big heads. Popularising this breed of dog is not in the interests of animal welfare. Sheenagh Tinkler Palmerston North The modern game day is a load of rubbish How to spoil a test match. Let the Sky showbiz frenzy team organise it. First, a man with a booming voice and a mic that can be heard all over Hamilton. A music device that drowns out the slightest sign of crowd spontaneity with explosions of music and instructions what to think. Smother the referee's instructions, spectator conversation and, in case attention is diverted from the razzmatazz, the game in play. Orchestrate, orchestrate, control, control. Abandon class. Aim for crass. Christopher Horan Lake Hawea Lights out I have noticed that the latest subdivision in Tomahawk, 45 sections of 'prime' real estate, has turned on the streetlights, of which there are 22. That is 22 new lights burning bright in a subdivision where 15 sections appear to have been sold but not a sod has turned a sod yet. For whom do these lights glow in the gloom of our night? Perhaps a solitary dog walker who otherwise may stumble off the sidewalk? For this subdivision is empty of life yet it is burning power, to what purpose I ask? Owen Kreft Dunedin No to plonkers on the council I have always been fascinated by the argument that politics have no place in local politics (John le Brun, Letters 15.7.25). Dunedin is unusual in having minimal participation by people who name their political affiliation. Personally I'm grateful to those who do - whether I support that affiliation or not. They are prepared to tell me straight up, simply by saying Green, Labour - and now Act New Zealand - the values they hold and will demonstrate around the council table. Some candidates I then easily dismiss from my potential list and others I will put to the top. That does leave a whole lot where I'm reading between the lines to find out more and hoping I don't either help elect a plonker by mistake or, worse, someone who is covertly aligned to a party whose values I don't support. Gio Angelo Belleknowes Well, yes, but In other times I might agree with V. H. Markham (Letters 17.7.25) that a city council should confine itself to local matters. Unfortunately, in this time - now - a genocide is happening. Thousands of unarmed civilians have been killed. Those remaining are at risk of detention and incarceration in a concentration camp. When very similar things happened in my parents' time, 80 years ago, the world eventually stood against it. Three common sayings come to mind: 'We didn't know'' and ''Never again.'' The third is the legal and philosophical adage ''Qui tacet consentire'' implying that ''He who is silent gives consent.'' I wish to speak out against the genocide of the Palestinian people. I am pleased that my city council has seen fit to speak out. I would dearly love my government to speak out - but they are silent. What will we say in five, 10, 80 years time? ''We didn't know''? Dorothy Browne North East Valley Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@
Newsroom
3 hours ago
- Newsroom
From modern to modular: the revolving door of open-plan classrooms
Analysis: Last week, headlines hailed the end of modern learning environments, following a press release from the education minister saying the Government 'calls time on open-plan classrooms'. While the Government might want parents – and schools – to believe this is the end of open-plan classrooms, that's not quite what's happening. It might have been more accurate to say the Government is sending a strong signal to schools that when they eventually build new classrooms or undertake upgrades to their existing school property, the Government would prefer they opt for one of their kitset, modular spaces now being offered by the ministry rather than completely open-plan classrooms. But without a law change, or at least a change to regulation, the Government is unable to direct schools – and communities – on exactly how their classrooms should be configured. And the education minister says she hopes it won't get to that point. The announcement comes off the back of a long-running discussion about the merits – or lack thereof – of innovative learning environments, which are also known as modern learning environments or open-plan classrooms. While Education Minister Erica Stanford has made comments about these so-called 'barnyard classrooms' since early in the parliamentary term, the move to try and phase out open-plan classrooms comes as the Government also announces a new crown entity to manage school property, off the back of major cost blowouts, poorly maintained classrooms, and a lack of transparency. Innovative learning environments – or what Stanford is calling open-plan classrooms – have been around since the 1980s, but more recently experienced widespread uptake under former National Party education minister Hekia Parata. Parata made a push for the classrooms that were more open, allowing for more flexibility regarding student-teacher ratios for schools under staffing pressure, more seamless use of digital devices, student-led learning, and collaborative teaching methods. In the wake of the Canterbury earthquakes, rebuilt schools were being fitted with these modern learning environments and Parata vowed to revamp every primary and secondary school – all 38,000 classrooms at the time – to the new modern learning environment standards by 2021. New Zealand wasn't the first to adopt these environments, with Australia and (of course) the Finnish also doing away with single-cell classrooms where the teacher stands in front of the rows of desks and students are expected to absorb knowledge. But it didn't take long for parents and teachers to revolt against the push for open-plan. In some cases, the dislike appeared to be that which always comes with change – especially in education. But over time parents, teachers, experts and officials raised issues with the noise in the classrooms. Parents of children on the autism spectrum or with neurodivergence were particularly concerned. Not all spaces were initially fitted with the right materials for acoustic cushioning and furniture that helped diffuse the higher noise levels that sometimes comes from the style of teaching and learning, where several conversations or lessons can be taking place at the same time. Meanwhile, some teachers had these new classrooms foisted on them without the appropriate professional development and training. They did not know how best to operate in the space, the modern pedagogy that aligned with collaborative teaching and learning, and general best practice. According to the secondary schools union PPTA – modern learning environment sceptics: a flexible learning environment is not an innovative learning environment. 'For a space to be innovative, the pedagogy needs to be innovative. Without innovative teaching practice, it is only an 'open plan' environment.' Under this Government and the last Labour-led Government, there has been a push to pull back from these types of classrooms. Some schools have taken it upon themselves to re-introduce walls, or at least sliding doors, to close up the space. And some have gone as far as to label classroom design as a notable contributor to New Zealand's educational achievement woes, citing noise, distraction, students feeling overwhelmed, and general behaviour issues. Just last week, Pāpāmoa College in the Bay of Plenty sent out a note announcing the school – built in 2011 – would be re-configuring all its open-plan spaces into single-cell classrooms. 'Our board considers this current layout as a significant barrier to educational achievement at Pāpāmoa College,' the online notice said. 'The school completed its own due diligence over the past few years and, amongst other things, trialled relocating senior students from the open plan spaces into our temporary relocatable classrooms. This initiative has resulted in positive achievement outcomes for the students and the school.' But it does not appear to be that simple. The research is unsettled, if not contradictory. The PPTA has long been calling for more research in this area, raising concerns that without evidence to support the rollout out of modern learning environments students were essentially being used as guinea pigs. (Primary teachers union NZEI Te Riu Roa doesn't have a position on the classrooms.) A similar message has come from libertarian think tank the NZ Initiative, which has written a report and pushed the message that there is no evidence to support the roll-out of these classrooms, and therefore they are bad. Following public discussion, political discourse, and the continued lurch from single-cell to open-plan and back again, the Ministry of Education did finally commission some research. In 2017, the study carried out at the University of Melbourne found 'open plan learning spaces lead to higher teacher mind frames and student deep learning'. Overall, the results were ambivalent. This report also called for further research. A 2019 study of English-medium primary schools from the NZ Council of Educational Research produced some similar findings, with teachers saying they enjoyed teaching in collaborative, open-plan environments. 'Sixty-two percent of those who taught in an innovative learning environment enjoyed teaching in such an environment, and 55 percent thought their teaching had changed for the better,' the survey report said. However, most of the teachers surveyed said some students found the spaces and way of learning overwhelming. Two years later NZCER carried out another study on secondary schools, which found secondary teachers also believed some of their students were overwhelmed and that teachers had not received the necessary professional learning and development required to teach effectively in these spaces. Meanwhile, New South Wales started to do away with the classrooms and a Senate inquiry also questioned their efficacy, saying many of the classrooms were designed by architects without proper knowledge of education or consultation with educators. One local example of this was at Grey Lynn School in Auckland, which was fitted with open-plan, collaborative learning environments, designed by architects. While there was some consultation with the board and previous principal, the school found it needed to retrospectively create a transition strategy, which helped staff understand the links between pedagogy, space and design. While much of the blame for the wholesale move to open-plan has been dumped at the feet of Hekia Parata, a former government source told Newsroom there were reasons to move in that direction at the time. Some schools were under staffing pressure and this design allowed for flexibility. It also coincided with a time when schools were increasing students' tech literacy and many were moving towards one-to-one device use. Moreover, it was being used in countries that were at the forefront of educational success. The source admitted it wasn't going to be the right fit for every learner or every teacher, but doing away with innovative learning environments without the research to prove they were detrimental was a short-sighted move. The anti-collaborative space debate was already bubbling away under the previous Labour government, and property was a feature of the 2018 Tomorrow's Schools review. The independent taskforce recommended removing school property decisions from boards, for a variety of reasons, including a lack of capacity and expertise when it came to design and project management. Ultimately, it was decided the Ministry of Education would provide advice on the feasibility and cost of taking on more property related responsibilities from boards over the next five to 10 years, while ensuring schools and communities continued to have significant input into the design of their physical spaces. Former education minister and Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has also been known to refer to the open-plan approach using the pejorative 'barnyard' description, but he says schools and communities should retain choice in the matter. When asked about the Government's so-called scrapping of open-plan classrooms last week he managed to synthesise the through-line from much of the inconclusive research: 'It comes down to the quality of teaching,' he said. 'It will all come down to whether you know that's actually being properly supported by professional practice. The quality of teaching is what makes the single biggest difference in schools, not the size of the classroom.' Questions about whether teachers have received the appropriate training and professional development to make the most of open-plan, collaborative spaces to enhance their practice and lift student outcomes have been canvassed by the research. But there's been little discussion about those barriers to lifting the quality of teaching, which has nothing to do with open-plan classrooms. This Government has identified the need for improvement in initial teacher education, ongoing professional development, non-contact time for planning classes, and support for students with additional needs. If these issues are addressed, it is more likely teachers will have the necessary expertise and capacity to make the most of innovative learning environments. Crucially, the research also fails to make a causal link between innovative learning environments and poor student achievement. While there is undoubtedly a lack of research to prove these environments are better for children, there is also nothing to prove they are worse. It is easy for school leaders, parents and politicians to point towards a simple, tangible thing as the reason for falling achievement. Especially when it's something that can be physically altered and sold as a fix. What educational research is clear on is that the single biggest factor affecting educational achievement in the classroom is the quality of teaching. But beyond that, societal factors, including a household's economic circumstances and structural racism in the education system are have the biggest influence on student outcomes. So, while the Government might like parents to think they're going to secure their children's future by doing away with open-plan classrooms, it's not that simple. And perhaps more to the point: they can't. While some schools – like Pāpāmoa College – are taking it upon themselves to upgrade or reconfigure classrooms back to single cells, under the current law the Government can't compel them to ditch open-plan. The Education and Training Act (clause 161) lays out what the Secretary of Education can specify, including minimum health and safety standards. Beyond that – without a change to regulations or this part of the law – the secretary (or the minister) can't direct a school what to do. This is why Hipkins has referred to last week's announcement about open-plan classrooms as 'virtue signalling'. But what the minister will be hoping is that it sends a strong signal to schools and communities that when they do come to do maintenance or upgrades on classrooms that they will think about whether to add in sliding doors that allow for partitioning and single-cell learning. Meanwhile, the raft of schools currently on the list to get additional classrooms to deal with roll growth will be offered the kitset, modular classroom design that are no bells and whistles, and can be used primarily for teaching in a single-cell configuration, with the ability to open into a wider space for certain activities, like assemblies, physical education, art or music classes. Essentially, she's looking for a phase-out. But if a school says they want to remain open-plan, or have new classrooms built in this collaborative style, they retain the power to do so. Stanford says she hopes they won't go that route. 'Overwhelming feedback I've received from schools across New Zealand is open-plan classrooms aren't meeting the needs of students. 'While open-plan designs were originally intended to foster collaboration, they have often created challenges for schools, particularly around noise and managing student behaviour,' she says. 'In many cases, open-plan classrooms reduce flexibility, rather than enhance it. We have listened to the sector and new classrooms will no longer be open plan.' The open-plan announcement came the same week Stanford unveiled a $120 million growth plan for Auckland schools that need to build more classrooms to account for new students in their area. This came alongside an announcement that a new crown entity, led by former National Party minister Murray McCully, will be set up to manage school property. When this Government took power it discovered a list of unfunded school property projects, big builds where the prices had blown out, and a general lack of transparency and mismanagement. Stanford set up a ministerial advisory group and commissioned an inquiry. At the time, an architecturally designed classroom was costing as much as $1.2 million, meaning some schools were missing out on new buildings because the funds weren't there. By focussing on kitset and modular designs, finding efficiencies of scale, and removing duplication, the cost of a classroom is now down to $620,000, Stanford says, adding that she thinks it can drop further still. Next in her sights is improving the maintenance programme for classrooms, meaning they'll last longer overall. One of the key priorities of this school property overhaul – and the new agency – is to increase transparency and accountability.
Otago Daily Times
3 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Luxon snaps back: 'I'm not taking any lectures from frickin Chris Hipkins'
By Craig McCulloch of RNZ Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has challenged Labour to front up with any policy at all as he comes under pressure over National's struggling childcare support scheme. The comment was made after Labour revealed just 153 families had received the maximum FamilyBoost rebate - well short of National's pre-election promise that 21,000 families would be eligible for the full amount. Speaking on his way into a caucus meeting this morning, Luxon rejected Labour's characterisation of the policy as a failure. "I'm not taking any lectures from frickin' Chris Hipkins or the Labour Party," he told reporters. "They have no idea what to do. They put us in this mess. "You can stand on the other side and criticise as much as you like, but I don't see any policy from Labour." Luxon said 60,000 families had received some support from the FamilyBoost policy and another 20,000 would soon be eligible due to recent tweaks to the eligibility settings. "Isn't that great? We have put a programme in place which Labour didn't support, didn't vote, don't back, because they don't back low-and-middle-income working New Zealanders." The former Labour government extended cheaper childcare to parents of two-year-olds, giving them access to 20 hours a week of free early childhood education. On taking office, the coalition reversed that policy and instead rolled out its more targeted FamilyBoost scheme - a weekly rebate on childcare costs. 'Absolute flop' Responding to Luxon's comments, Labour leader Chris Hipkins said National's refusal to admit the FamilyBoost scheme was "an absolute flop" showed it was completely out of touch. "They're getting really desperate. On a daily basis, they're attacking me and attacking the Labour Party rather than talking about their own track record." He defended Labour's lack of public policy, saying that would all be laid out in full before next year's general election. "We're not even close to an election campaign at the moment," Hipkins said. "But unlike him, when we go into the election campaign next year, I will make sure that the policies that we have add up." Labour wanted to see the government's next Budget before it outlined significant policies which would cost money, he said, and suggested a lot of policy work was under way in the background. "The National Party desperately wants to talk about the Labour Party's policy at the moment because their own policies are turning into an absolute disaster zone." National also came under criticism when it was in opposition for a paucity of policy heading into the 2023 election year, but it had released elements of its tax plan and several discussion documents indicating a direction of travel.
