Action at teachers coll:

A mosquito draws blood

At a very lively and very well attended meeting at Wellington Teachers College, last Wednesday, 700 odd student teachers decided that Mr. Amos had in fact drawn blood and they weren't going to have any of it. Although they were prepared to concede that the minister had already made some changes to the S.T.B. regarding student teachers they still felt that they were not enough. The Special General Meeting replacing a postponed stop-work/march, passed motions 'opposing the setting up of a bond requirement on the S.T.B. student teachers supplement that is greater than the person's present rate of bonding'. They agreed that they would 'accept nothing less than a reasonable living wage for students as well as a removal of the bonding system for student teachers'. If there is to be a bond they reaffirmed their policy 'of student teachers being allowed leave of absence as of right, and a greater flexibility of movement between government departments'.

In another very significant motion which was passed quite overwhelmingly 'that STANZ be the sole representative body of WTCSA', thus dispelling any claims by NZEI to represent us. It was decided that these motions be presented to the minister in our meeting with him on Thursday and another S.G.M. be held at 9.00am Monday morning to discuss the minister's reaction and any consequent action.

Well, the fated meeting with the gentleman who does Minister of Education impressions has come and gone. He confirmed our worst held fears that the supplementary bond will be a $ for $ repayment over and above the S.T.B. — a figure around $3,500 would be conservative and he made no attempt to deny this. The minister could not agree that this would be an equal detterent, as the S.T.B., to the older financially committed person (52% of the 1974/75 intake) or students from the lower-socio-economic group. Its naive to imagine that the parents of a large, working class family will be able to bond themselves for such a high amount. And naive is the impression that the minister conveyed. Naive to the problems that the S.T.B. will have to student teachers, teachers' Colleges and consequently those people teaching our nation's children in the future. When questioned about the fact that student teachers have shorter holidays in which to supplement their income, he simply stated that that was a fact of life. When asked why the preference clause had been included in the budget, he stated that it was an unfortunate wording on the part of the Minister of Finance. But when shown a letter sent to College Councils after the Budget, which also included the preference clause, he had to turn to his right-hand man from the Education Department to explain. He said the letter had since been rescinded. When we asked Mr. Amos to postpone the S.T.B. for student teachers until a full inquiry into teacher training and the implications that a S.T.B. would have on it, he virtually showed us the door, saying that there was not much point in continuing these discussions. Only some quick talking on our part enabled us to stay. Not that it did much good. The minister continued to be both negative and cagey and the meeting came to an end.

A representative from NZEI talks to Wednesday's meeting.

So where do we go from here? I feel we now have to muster support for our cause, both within Parliament and outside it. We must make members of the Govt. realise that Mr. Amos moves have put his seat, and several other MP's, in jepardy. It is no longer any good having discussions with Amos — the change must come from other sources. We must write letters and send telegrams informing people of our feelings. We must gain support from other student bodies and in fact any organisation concerned with Education and the future of NZ's teachers. We must continue to lobby MP's and make them aware of our presence. We must make Mr. Amos statement in the house 'that all students are now happy with the S.T.B.' out for what it is. But of course the actions we take will be decided by the students on Monday. If they decide that stronger more forceful action is needed, then I certainly won't blame them.