The cost of a "free" education in New Zealand is rising: $160,000,000 was paid by parents of schoolchildren last year. But can this cost be significantly reduced?

One of the reasons is the donation for our schools’ increasing cost, which mainly comes from books and stationery. At the beginning of each school year, each student has to pay tens or hundreds of dollars to buy new books and stationery. But from my experience and my survey, most of these costs are completely unnecessary. Not replacing books and school journals in primary and intermediate school for four or five years at a stretch helps pupils revise areas from previous years, saves money, and is better for the environment. Reusing books brings tremendous benefits.So I strongly suggest that we aggressively reuse books and stationery in schools in order to save for our children and our future.

Imagine if the annual resource fee for one student was a mere quarter of what it is now. Donations solicited from students in low-decile schools can be greatly reduced. Suppose that not having to buy new textbooks saves $50 a year (a fairly conservative estimate) for a student: if he does not need to buy further books for four years, that is $200 saved. This would be possible because differences in difficulty between year levels in primary schools are extremely subtle and textbooks can cover a range of levels. Alternatively, textbooks can cover only one year level and be smaller than the textbooks mentioned previously, and four or more generations of students can use that same book.

From personal experience, my brother who is in Year 5 currently at the end of last year brought home beautifully colour-printed school books and booklets he used throughout the year. Judging from this, I surmise that the next cohort of students next year will somehow have to raise funds to purchase new books again, which is totally unnecessary. Stationery is also a perennial source of extravagant wastage. Stationery shops have direct incentives to offload as many goods onto parents who do not fully know stationery requirements, as evidenced by the aggressive “Back-to-School” sales ubiquitous near the end of all summer holidays. This is regardless of whether everything purchased will be fully used by the end of the year, or even touched once; stationery (and gluesticks) too can be used over several years. We must consider the interests of the stationary shops and book publishers, but an indirect consequence of wastefulness at primary and intermediate level is that students learn to treat improvidence with indifference and apathy.

If indeed four or five cohorts use the same textbooks in primary and intermediate school, with books replaced only every five or so years instead of annually, then that $200 per student saved turns into $95,000,000 saved by 475,000 primary and intermediate students – in one year. In all eight years before secondary school, the conservative estimate is $760,000,000. With this perspective, the issues with families not being able to fully afford education will be at least partly alleviated.

Very few students manage to finish a year without having a handful of gaps in subject knowledge. If a textbook contains material suitable for a range of years, then it would also be possible for students to easily patch up areas of weakness from earlier years. Environmentally, if we cut down on stationery and book purchasing, then less pollution will be produced, helping to maintain New Zealand's "Clean and Green" label.

I strongly suggest that this issue be seriously considered and not neglected by our society. If this petition is successful, the many households could benefit financially.

George Wang