What are we to make of the two multi-millionaire politicians - the two Johns - signing an agreement whereby the state abandons any responsibility for education in poor communities and instead hands it over to various churches, charities, American multinational franchises and any fly-by-night concern that sniffs a buck to be made. Apparently, the two Johns think poor communities are disadvantaged by having to learn what everyone else learns, do the same qualifications and have trained and qualified teachers so they are giving poor kids that chance to miss out on all the the things that wee Keys and the little Bankses take as their birthright.

Amazingly, lowering standards like this is apparently going to lift achievement even though that's not what has happened in the US which invented charter schools. The studies don't show any educational benefits for the model, once you control for the tendency to manipulate the school's roll to keep out the more challenging kids.

Even though the government's own Green Paper on Vulnerable Children points out that being born in poverty blights children's educational potential, the two Johns know better. Well they would wouldn't they? It would be so unpleasant for them to have to pay a reasonable share of tax from their humungous incomes in order to eliminate poverty in New Zealand. Much better for them to pretend poverty is caused by schools so they can bask in the feelings of moral superiority it gives them. Then, as well , there's the satisfaction of doing a favour for all their multi-millionaire friends whose greedy and selfish life has become such a bore they feel a bit of charity coming on.

The weird thing is that virtually none of the inhabitants of South Auckland and East Christchurch will have voted for John Key and certainly not for the ACT party, yet they are to be subject to this unfortunate experiment. Why doesn't Banks wreck the schools in his own (comprehensively gerrymandered but his nevertheless, own) electorate. Alternatively why not not bus all the kids from the wrong side of the tracks to the nice, white, well-endowed, middle-class schools in Epsom and Fendalton? After all if it's all about good schools and nothing to do with socio-economic status, that should work. It would be cheaper after all, and doesn't require that the children of the poor be subject to an ill-advised social experiment whereby wealthy and paternalistic do-gooders have a go at running schools for profit.

Then again, Banks and Key could show some "strong, principled" leadership and commit to addressing the poverty that overwhelms so many of the families in South Auckland and East Christchurch.

We knew they were going to sell our assets but we didn't realise that included our children.