GLOBAL – In a move that has ignited fierce debate across New Zealand and drawn attention from nations grappling with similar post-colonial legacies, the government on Tuesday, 4 November 2025, confirmed it would scrap a key legal requirement for schools to incorporate local Māori culture and knowledge in their governance and curriculum. The decision has been sharply condemned by teachers, principals, and school boards as a significant setback for indigenous education and social cohesion.

The policy change directly impacts the Education and Training Act 2020, which had obligated school boards to “give effect” to the Treaty of Waitangi. Signed in 1840 between the British Crown and Māori chiefs, the treaty is New Zealand's founding document and a cornerstone of Māori rights. The now-removed clause required schools to ensure their policies, plans, and local curricula reflected Māori customs (tikanga Māori), knowledge (mātauranga Māori), and worldviews.

A Mirror to Kenya's Curriculum Debates

The developments in New Zealand present a compelling parallel to Kenya's ongoing efforts to decolonise its education system. Kenya's Competency-Based Curriculum (CBC), progressively introduced to replace the 8-4-4 system, explicitly aims to be more learner-centred and context-aware. A key component of this reform is the integration of indigenous knowledge systems and languages to make education more relevant to local communities.

However, the implementation of indigenous language teaching under the CBC has faced significant challenges, including a lack of qualified teachers, inadequate resources, and the need for clearer policy frameworks. The debate in New Zealand over whether such cultural obligations are a core part of education or an unfair burden on schools resonates with the practical hurdles facing Kenyan educators. The policy shift in Wellington serves as a critical international case study on the political and practical complexities of embedding indigenous heritage into a national education framework.

Government Justification and Opposition Response

New Zealand's Education Minister, Erica Stanford, defended the decision, arguing the obligation was an unfair burden on school boards, which are comprised of elected volunteers such as parents and teachers. In a statement, Stanford claimed the requirement “made no difference to raising the achievement of Māori [children]” and that boards had lost focus on core duties like student achievement and attendance. She asserted that the Crown, not individual school boards, holds the primary responsibility for fulfilling treaty obligations. The government maintains that boards will still be required to “seek to achieve equitable outcomes for Māori students” and can choose to teach local culture.

This rationale has been widely rejected by educational leaders. The New Zealand School Boards Association (NZSBA) stated the move “undermines the legal and practical standing of school boards as Crown entities and risks damaging wider social cohesion, to no clear benefit.” NZSBA President Meredith Kennett argued the clause was a practical and unifying influence, not a divisive one, and its removal was introduced without proper consultation. Critics, including Māori principals' association Te Akatea, have framed the decision as part of a broader government pattern of erasing Māori language and perspectives from official documents, warning it will take the school system backwards and sideline indigenous children.

Broader Context of Indigenous Rights

The policy change does not exist in a vacuum. It follows other contentious decisions, including removing Māori words from some early reading books and proposals to fold the country's specific histories curriculum—which mandates teaching about colonisation and the Treaty of Waitangi—into a broader social sciences subject. These actions are seen by opponents as part of a wider political trend to roll back policies aimed at Māori advancement and co-governance.

For nations like Kenya, which are constitutionally bound to protect and promote cultural diversity, the events in New Zealand highlight the persistent tension between central government policy and the drive for culturally sustaining education. As Kenya continues to refine the CBC, the backlash in Wellington underscores the importance of robust stakeholder consultation and sustained political will to ensure indigenous knowledge is not merely an 'add-on', but a fundamental component of national identity and learning.