Letters: Dilworth victim backs school’s response to abuse scandal; making a meal of the school lunch saga

New Dilworth School trust chairman Jonathan Mason has apologised to survivors, to others who had died, to their families for previous sexual abuse at the school and to all past and present students and staff. Photo / Dean Purcell

Letters to the Editor

Dilworth victim backs school’s abuse response

Robert MacCulloch, an economics professor with no obvious links to Dilworth School, writes that he thinks it should become a Charter School and the trust wound up (Mar 11).

What support does he have for this? Has he interviewed any survivors of abuse, like me, to ask them what they want? Does his background in economics give him any special insight into primary and secondary school education?

What evidence does he have that the historical abuse would not have occurred under different settings like a Charter School? Former leadership staff and trustees let boys, like me, down repeatedly. This was unacceptable.

As far as I can tell from a very close and personal connection with this situation, the current leadership staff and trustees have done as much as they can to support survivors including through redress, an apology and, most importantly, actively ensuring abuse won’t happen again.

This is what we survivors have asked for for decades and we feel so vindicated it’s happened. We don’t need economics professors, who earn far more than school leaders and trustees, to write uninformed nonsense.

Dilworth has always provided exceptional education and I am hopeful it will now match this with exceptional care for its current and future students.

Name withheld.

Polls apart

The latest Taxpayers’ Union poll with a sampling of 1000 Kiwis is statistically negligible and can’t accurately predict who might form a government in 2026, (Mar 11).

However, what it does achieve is a snapshot of the mood in New Zealand at the moment, which is decidedly negative. Part of the issue for the Prime Minister not gaining traction with the public is, in part, due to his coalition partners dominating the news cycle with bluster and blather in equal measure, and swallowing whole anything Christopher Luxon has to say.

To add to his woes, instead of being inspiring, he comes across as insipid, which is not a winning trait in a leader. We don’t want the three-ring circus of American politics, but in this era of sound bites and visual impact, ho-hum doesn’t cut it.

The other potential reason for the PM not resonating with New Zealanders is that his pledge to fix the economy hasn’t been translated into those bulging back pockets he constantly talks about. To date, the public service, in meeting Government directives, has made redundant conservatively 2250 roles and removed 1150 previous job vacancies, with the biggest cuts to Health NZ, the Ministry of Social Development and the Ministry of Education.

The promise made that these cuts would be re-invested in frontline services is starting to ring hollow, because hospital waiting times are getting worse, our lowest socio-economic family’s deprivation continues unabated and the Kiwis we need to build a future for this country are leaving in droves.

So, do we really prefer Labour, as the polls suggest, or do we not want this coalition Government even more? New Zealanders deserve better.

Mary Hearn, Glendowie.

Making a meal

Almost daily we are being told through the media of difficulties being experienced by schools with the lunch programme.

Yes, the new providers are struggling to deliver at times but this can be expected at the phase-in period when one realises the logistics involved in a nationwide rollout. The media is making a meal of this. It appears to be more newsworthy than events in Eastern Europe, our shattered economy, an underperforming health system or our broken infrastructure. Is this intense scrutiny of the school lunch programme politically driven?

Give a little time for the programme to deliver. Meantime, if parents have concerns about whether a lunch will be provided through the school, they should take the advice of Christopher Luxon and provide one. Parents have the prime responsibility of feeding their kids, not the schools.

Dan Power, Mount Maunganui.

Expanded eulogies

While I understand correspondent Jock Mac Vicar’s sentiment behind limiting eulogies to two minutes, I respectfully disagree (Mar 11). A funeral is one of the few times in life where time should not feel rushed. It is a space for grieving, remembering and honouring the person who has passed in the way that feels most meaningful to those left behind.

Not everyone processes grief in the same way and for many speaking at a funeral is both a tribute and a personal moment of healing. To impose strict time constraints on these expressions risks diminishing the depth of emotion and significance attached to them. If a eulogy feels long, perhaps Mr Mac Vicar should consider that it may be exactly what the deceased wanted.

It is also worth reflecting as to whether Mr Mac Vicar would want his own eulogy to be cut short. Would he prefer a concise summary, or would he hope that those who knew him best would take their time, share memories, and truly honour his life?

A funeral is not an event to be hurried through - it is a moment to pause, reflect and appreciate the life that was lived. Some patience and compassion in those moments can go a long way.

Hannah Peddie, Cambridge.