Ministry of Education pushes back on claims Gloriavale school shut down was rushed
The registration of the school serving the Gloriavale Christian Community on the West Coast has been cancelled by the Secretary for Education, Ellen Macgregor-Reid, following a failed Education Review Office (ERO) report. While the school remains open due to an ongoing legal challenge by its board, the Ministry of Education is currently seeking to lift the interim orders that prevent the closure.
The mechanism of closure
The process for cancelling a school’s registration is governed by safety and compliance standards. In this instance, the Ministry triggered the closure based on ERO findings that the school was not a physically or emotionally safe environment for its approximately 80 students. The Ministry argues that the process was not rushed, spanning five months and including a notice to comply issued in July 2025, as well as a previous cancellation attempt in December 2025.
Conditions for registration and safety
To maintain registration, a school must demonstrate it can protect students from harm. The ERO report cited a pattern of institutional failure, specifically alleging that the school knowingly employed staff with prior convictions unsuitable for work with children and failed to act when risks to students were identified. Evidence presented by the Ministry included a teacher’s guilty plea to a historic assault and a recent complaint regarding a historic sexual assault by a staff member.
The legal dispute over due process
The central point of contention in the High Court judicial review is whether the Secretary for Education followed the required procedural steps before cancelling the registration. Gloriavale’s legal counsel argues that the September decision was a “fresh look” at the school and that the Secretary failed to issue a new notice to comply. Conversely, the Ministry maintains that the school was already “on notice” due to previous warnings and the 2025 notice.
The court is currently weighing whether the Secretary had sufficient time to consider all relevant information before making the final decision. While the board claims the decision-making window was too narrow, the Ministry asserts that the level of annotation in the reports proves the evidence was properly scrutinized.