• Skip to content
  • Skip to navigation
Global site
  • Global site
  • Algeria
  • Botswana
  • Cameroon
  • Egypt
  • Ethiopia
  • Gabon
  • Guinea
  • Kenya
  • Libya
  • Malawi
  • Mauritius
  • Morocco
  • Nigeria
  • Namibia
  • Senegal
  • South Africa
  • Togo
  • Tunisia
  • Uganda
  • Zambia
  • Zimbabwe
  • Anguilla
  • Antigua
  • Argentina
  • Aruba, Bonaire, Curacao and St. Maarten
  • Barbados
  • Bolivia
  • Brazil
  • British Virgin Islands
  • Canada LLP
  • Canada RCGT
  • Cayman Islands
  • Chile
  • Colombia
  • Costa Rica
  • Ecuador
  • El Salvador
  • Grenada
  • Guatemala
  • Honduras
  • Mexico
  • Montserrat
  • Nicaragua
  • Panama
  • Paraguay
  • Peru
  • Puerto Rico
  • St Kitts
  • St Lucia
  • St Vincent and the Grenadines
  • Trinidad & Tobago
  • United States
  • Uruguay
  • Venezuela
  • Turks & Caicos
  • Afghanistan
  • Australia
  • Bangladesh
  • Cambodia
  • China
  • Hong Kong
  • India
  • Indonesia
  • Japan
  • Korea
  • Malaysia
  • Mongolia
  • Myanmar
  • New Zealand
  • Pakistan
  • Philippines
  • Singapore
  • Taiwan
  • Thailand
  • Vietnam
  • Albania
  • Armenia
  • Austria
  • Azerbaijan
  • Belarus
  • Belgium
  • Bosnia and Herzegovina
  • Bulgaria
  • Channel Islands
  • Croatia
  • Cyprus
  • Czech Republic
  • Denmark
  • Estonia
  • Finland
  • France
  • Georgia
  • Germany
  • Gibraltar
  • Greece
  • Hungary
  • Iceland
  • Ireland
  • Isle of Man
  • Israel
  • Italy - Bernoni
  • Italy - Ria
  • Kazakhstan
  • Kosovo
  • Kyrgyzstan
  • Latvia
  • Liechtenstein
  • Lithuania
  • Luxembourg
  • Macedonia
  • Malta
  • Moldova
  • Monaco
  • Netherlands
  • Northern Ireland
  • Norway
  • Poland
  • Portugal
  • Romania
  • Russia
  • Serbia
  • Slovak Republic
  • Slovenia
  • Spain
  • Sweden
  • Switzerland
  • Tajikistan
  • Turkey
  • Ukraine
  • UK
  • Uzbekistan
  • Bahrain
  • Egypt
  • Jordan
  • Kuwait
  • Oman
  • Qatar
  • Saudi Arabia
  • United Arab Emirates
  • Yemen
  • Lebanon
Grant Thorton Logo

Grant Thornton Logo Grant Thornton logo

  • Meet our people
  • Insights
  • Services
  • Industries
  • Careers
  • Locations
  • Business advisory services
  • Financial advisory services
  • Tax
  • Audit
  • Operational advisory
Business advisory services Home
  • NZTE support for businesses impacted by COVID-19
Financial advisory services Home
  • Asia Services Group
  • Business valuations
  • Capital markets
  • Complex and international services
  • Corporate insolvency
  • Debt advisory
  • Expert witness
  • Financial models
  • Forensic and investigation services
  • Independent business review
  • IT forensics
  • Mergers and acquisitions
  • Raising finance
  • Relationship property services
  • Restructuring and turnaround
  • Transaction advisory
Tax Home
  • Corporate tax
  • Employment tax
  • Global mobility services
  • GST
  • International tax
  • Research and Development
  • Tax compliance
  • Transfer pricing
Audit Home
  • Audit methodology
  • Audit technology
  • Financial reporting advisory
Operational advisory Home
  • Business architecture
  • Internal audit
  • IT advisory
  • IT privacy and security
  • PCI DSS
  • Process improvement
  • Procurement/supply chain
  • Project assurance
  • Risk management
  • Robotic process automation (RPA)
  • Energy and resources
  • Financial services
  • Food and beverage
  • Health and aged care
  • Media and entertainment
  • Not for profit
  • Professional services
  • Public sector
  • Real estate and construction
  1. Grant Thornton New Zealand
  2. Press releases
  3. 2016
  4. Budget 2016: free education comes at a cost

Budget 2016: free education comes at a cost

05 May 2016
  • 2016

Visit www.education.govt.nz. The website proudly states that between the ages of 5 and 19, your child’s education is free. But is it really?

On the face of it New Zealand has never spent more on education. In last year’s Budget the Government touted its record $10.8 billion annual investment in education. It is likely this year’s spend will be greater still.Despite this, the cost of sending your child to school has never been greater.

These costs come in the form of the add-ons – contributions the school asks for because it cannot cover the costs itself. Donations and stationery packs may be voluntary for parents, but societal pressure often ensures that voluntary quickly feels compulsory.

Consider also new teaching and learning methods. Much has been made of the need for increased levels of digital literacy and self-directed learning. The Government’s considerable (and laudable) investment in the Network for Learning has ensured that most schools now access fast, secure fibre connections that take learning off the blackboard and into the cloud. All this, however, requires a digital device.

Few schools can afford to equip their students with the full suite of tools necessary for this style of learning. So parents must wear the cost through bring-your-own-device (BYOD) policies. It falls to them to carry these costs, at a time when the nation is focused on the increasing inequality gap.

Such policies may make sense at a secondary school level – most secondary students will already have some kind of device, and they use them extensively. But are BYOD policies necessary at primary school? And how onerous should such policies be permitted to be? A $500 Chromebook may be reasonable for a middle income family with one child, but what if all three of your children need one?

The question facing the Government, therefore, is what are schools and parents actually getting for their money in this year’s Budget? Should attempts be made to limit the cost of add-ons, or make them claimable as part of the rebate on their school donations; or are they simply a part of the cost of raising a child in our society?

To eliminate school donations and additional costs entirely would likely send Treasury over the edge. And the Government is unapologetic in its desire to use public money intelligently and not carte blanche. This is the right mentality, but it presents challenges.

Budget 2016 needs to ensure the Government’s considerable investment in Vote Education is being intelligently targeted. Ministers English and Parata should seek to ensure money is going where it is needed, and will do the most good. No expenditure of this size can be individually tailored. But neither should it be one size fits all.

Further enquiries, please contact:

Stacey Davies
Partner, Privately Held Business
Grant Thornton New Zealand
T +64 (0)9 308 2591
E stacey.davies@nz.gt.com

  • Follow us on Instagram
  • LinkedIn icon
  • Twitter icon
  • Facebook icon
CONNECTclose
  • Contact us
  • Make an enquiry/submit an RFP
  • Meet our people
  • Careers
  • Alumni
  • Locations
ABOUTclose
  • About Grant Thornton
  • Insights
  • Press
LEGALclose
  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Sitemap

© 2021 Grant Thornton International Ltd (GTIL) - All rights reserved. "Grant Thornton” refers to the brand under which the Grant Thornton member firms provide assurance, tax and advisory services to their clients and/or refers to one or more member firms, as the context requires. GTIL and the member firms are not a worldwide partnership. GTIL and each member firm is a separate legal entity. Services are delivered by the member firms. GTIL does not provide services to clients. GTIL and its member firms are not agents of, and do not obligate, one another and are not liable for one another’s acts or omissions.

    • EN