He pitopito kōrero
News
.jpg)
News stories
The Privacy Commissioner's report on the inquiry into the Ministry of Social Development's benefit fraud investigations (released May 2019) included identifying issues related to domestic violence.
The Office of the Privacy Commissioner inquiry found "... the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) systematically misused its investigatory powers while pursuing benefit fraud, unjustifiably intruding on the privacy of many beneficiaries."
The Privacy Commissioner's inquiry looked at MSD's use of information gathering powers under Section 11 of the Social Security Act 1964 (now found in Schedule 6, Social Security Act 2018) and compliance with the Code Of Conduct for obtaining information under Section 11 Social Security Act 1964.
Under the Social Security Act, MSD has the power to collect information about a person who is receiving a benefit to assess their eligibility. This practice is governed by the Code of Conduct. In 2012, MSD advised their fraud investigation staff that they could go directly to third parties for information about a beneficiary without asking the beneficiary first. Information collected included text messages, domestic violence and other Police records, banking information and billing records from a range of providers.
While the inquiry did not focus specifically on domestic violence, the Commissioner's report highlighted issues specific to victims of domestic violence who were investigated.
Seven of the 17 sample investigation files reviewed in the inquiry involved investigations of "marriage type relationships" and contained indications of domestic violence or abuse. In half of these, a debt was established against the individual.
"Marriage type relationships" investigations concern whether the individual is in a relationship "in the nature of marriage" to decide if the person is entitled to a single person or a couple rate of assistance (the former being higher than the latter).
The Commissioner noted:
"Ruka v Department of Social Welfare makes plain that a relationship ‘in the nature of marriage’ must involve financial support or interdependence, accompanied by a continuing emotional commitment. The judgment observed that there is a level of violence that if present in a relationship would serve to negate or undermine any emotional commitment."
The Commissioner went on to write:
"Because a relationship is made up of many elements it can be difficult to establish whether it is of the significance anticipated by the term ‘in the nature of marriage’. The views of the individual accused of being in such a relationship should therefore be sought, particularly in cases where the Ministry suspects that violence may be present in the relationship.
There may also be a risk to the personal safety of an individual in a potentially violent relationship if assessments are not made on a case by case basis as to the most appropriate manner to engage with parties. This could be the individual or third parties. The Ministry assures us that in this area, case-by-case assessments are standard practice. It is my view that if the Ministry wish to know whether an alleged relationship contains violence they should ask the individual involved, unless to do so would put that individual at risk.
I am concerned that if the Ministry’s practice of gathering this type of information were widely known, individuals could be discouraged from seeking Police support out of fear the Ministry could use the information against them in the future."
The Commissioner found that some of the information gathered was "highly intrusive." Specific to domestic violence records he noted:
"5.19 Domestic violence records contain a large amount of highly sensitive information about the individuals involved. In some cases, the records contain details of sexual assaults.
5.20 The Ministry generally frames its requests as demands for all ‘Police reports of domestic incidences involving the above-named persons, for the purpose of confirming a marriage type relationship’. Many of the requests we have reviewed ask for up to a decade’s worth of information about individuals.
5.21 Even where the Ministry has legitimate reasons for collecting this type of information, it is nevertheless highly intrusive."
In one of the case studies in the report, the Commissioner highlighted that the Police information collected by MSD indicated there was violence present in the relationship however the "Ministry assessed that the violence was not at a level sufficient to negate the relationship was one in the ‘nature of marriage’." The Commissioner wrote that this case:
"... underlines the complexity of the cases investigated by the Ministry and the need for clear training and guidance to investigative staff on issues such as domestic violence. The case also highlights the importance of case by case assessments of the most suitable evidence to seek and information gathering methods for investigations."
The Privacy Commissioner outlined five recommendations in the report. The recommendations include ceasing the current practice, reviewing section 11, reviewing the Code of Conduct, developing training and guidance for all fraud investigation teams, and reviewing the Decision Support Tool related to investigations. The recommendations do not specifically address domestic violence.
The full report, Inquiry into the Ministry of Social Development’s Exercise of Section 11 (Social Security Act 1964) and Compliance with the Code of Conduct: Report by the Privacy Commissioner pursuant to section 13(1)(m) of the Privacy Act 1993 (2019), is available online.
Response from MSD
MSD stated it accepted the recommendations of the reported and noted they have made the following changes:
- "Amending our processes ensuring staff make a case-by-case decision on whether to first go to the client, or to a third party and to make sure the right amount of information is collected.
- Suspending all requests for information to telecommunications companies and Police, pending review of the Code of Conduct.
- A commitment to review the Code of Conduct that applies to the section and continuing to work with the OPC.
- Commissioning an independent assessment of fraud practices and policies."
MSD also said staff are available to answer questions from people who have concerns about their fraud investigations.
MSD previously announced in October 2018 that they would review the process for handling fraud investigations. MSD also launched its Privacy, Human Rights and Ethics Framework at that time.
Further information
A report written by Catriona MacLennan and published by the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) in 2016 ("Kathryn's story") has previously highlighted related issues around violence, relationship status and benefit fraud.
A 2018 report from the Australia-based National Social Security Rights Network, How well does Australia’s social security system support victims of family and domestic violence?, identified a number of issues with the welfare system for women who were victims of domestic and family violence.
Related news
The final report from the Government commissioned Welfare Expert Advisory Group (WEAG) was released in May 2019. The Ministry of Social Development and Oranga Tamariki - Ministry for Children have also published two evidence briefs exploring the link between child protection and welfare policies, including sanctions. For more information see our previous story Welfare Expert Advisory Group report released; research on child protection and welfare.
Related media
Process to get benefit money backdated 'punitive and retraumatising', RNZ, 12.07.2021
Few respond to MSD fraud investigation report, RNZ, 07.08.2019
Media must interrogate menacing privacy breaches, Newsroom, 22.05.2019
Ministry of Social Development systematically misusing powers - inquiry, Radio NZ, 16.05.2019
Social Development Ministry slammed for invading privacy, Radio NZ, 16.05.2019
The Speaker of the House of Representatives of New Zealand, Trevor Mallard, has released the report of the independent review of bullying and harassment in the Parliamentary workplace.
The review and report were completed by external reviewer Debbie Francis. In her introductory summary, The Story in a Nutshell, Ms Francis writes "Bullying and harassment are systemic in the parliamentary workplace."
She states "The story is complex, involving harmful behaviour by and between staff, managers, Members, media and the public." Watch a brief video of Ms Francis presenting the report and The Story in a Nutshell.
The report, Independent External Review into Bullying and Harassment in the New Zealand Parliamentary Workplace - Final Report (2019), includes 85 recommendations. Ms Francis cautions:
"This Report traverses sensitive matters within one of the most complex and demanding workplaces in New Zealand. The story goes as much to the health of our democracy and New Zealanders’ pride in their Parliament as it does to matters of employment, health, safety and workplace culture. My findings need to be addressed with care and the solutions recommended here are complex and wide-ranging. For these reasons I encourage readers to take the time to read the Report in its entirety."
The review looked at Parliamentary Service, Department of Internal Affairs / Ministerial and Secretariat Services and the Office of the Clerk from 2014 - 2019. The review process included:
- 102 written submissions
- An online survey with more than 1000 responses
- 146 self-nominated individual interviews
- Feedback through phone calls
- 55 interviews with Ministers, Members of Parliament and Party officials randomly selected across Party, tenure in Parliament, age, gender and ethnicity
- 40 focus groups.
The report examines risk factors unique to the Parliamentary workplace, findings related to bullying and harassment, sexual harassment as specific topic, impacts to respondents and current systems in place.
For the specific focus on sexual harassment, questions were asked in both the survey and interviews about offensive remarks, comments, jokes or gestures including allegations of bias or harassment against LGBTQI groups; unwanted touching; unwanted sexual advances; messages of a sexual nature sent to someone via email, direct messaging or social media; sexual coercion; and sexual assault.
14 people from the online survey and five from the interviews reported they had experienced sexual assault. Ms Francis intentionally kept her commentary brief in this area due to confidentiality and because some incidents may be involved in police investigations. Ms Francis wrote:
"Three of the alleged incidents disclosed to me in interviews were in my view extremely serious and some appeared to be part of a multi-year pattern of predatory behaviour. It was common for respondents to report that, in the event of sexual harassment or sexual violence, there was nowhere, other than directly to Police, that they could turn to for support or to report the harassment or violence. 'The power imbalances are so great round here, that why would you even bother?' said one. 'What are they going to do?', said another '…Chuck some EAP at me. Then what?'"
The report highlights that victims found that Parliamentary and human resource systems failed to adequately support, respond or manage their complaints. Ms Francis highlights one example:
"Another respondent alleging this told me that their formal written complaint regarding an alleged sexual assault matter did not result in the suspension of the accused, took several months to investigate and the respondent was never provided with written notification of the outcome of the investigation.
The respondent recalls being told that the accused was entitled to a letter about the outcome of the formal investigation, but as the complainant they were not. They told me that while access to EAP was encouraged by Parliamentary Service HR, they struggled to gain access to additional specialist support.
They also described feeling at risk of retaliation by the accused during and after the investigation. Though they requested some protective interventions, it is this respondent’s perception that none were put in play.
As a result, the respondent told me they felt they had to constantly devise informal support strategies to keep themself separate from the accused in the normal course of work and alleged that they continued to suffer ongoing trauma as a result."
The recommendations are wide ranging and many address sexual violence and assault within a broader approach to address harassment and bullying. There are two recommendations specifically related to sexual violence and assault:
"19. I recommend the services of accredited social workers or psychologists with experience in sexual harm be secured, on precinct, in regions and accessible via a confidential, dedicated helpline."
"82. I recommend the new parliamentary HR shared services group develops the following new and revised stand alone policies for the parliamentary workplace:
- Anti-bullying and harassment
- Sexual harassment and sexual assault
- Protected disclosures
- Alcohol use within the parliamentary precinct
- Conflicts of interest in Parliament
- Racist, homophobic, sexist and transphobic comments
- Balancing parliamentary and political work; and
- Behavioural protocols for interactions between Members of Parliament and Members of the Parliamentary Press Gallery."
In releasing the report, Speaker Trevor Mallard said:
"Together with the agencies and all political parties, I am committed to making changes to ensure the parliamentary workplace is free from harmful behaviour. We will now consider the report’s recommendations. The issues in the report will not be a quick fix and any solutions will need to have input from those affected and address the systemic issues.”
Trevor Mallard asked Deputy Speaker Anne Tolley to lead a group to develop a Code of Conduct for New Zealand Parliament. Anne Tolley confirmed she is chairing the working group, which is still being set up but includes representatives from the political parties, the press gallery and unions (PSA and E Tū).
In response to the review, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said:
“The findings of this report are rightly being taken very seriously. Parliament, like any other workplace, should be free from bullying and harassment and we need to make improvements. In response to the report, I have asked to receive regular reports from the Department of Internal Affairs and Parliamentary Services on how offices are working generally as well as any exceptional reports where an issue needs to be raised with me promptly."
Following media coverage and a complaint, a Parliamentary staff member was stood down pending an investigation.
Update: Parliamentary Services has published Behavioural Statements for the parliamentary workplace, released publicly in October 2020.
Update: In June 2022 the Parliamentary Service Commission adopted a recommendation to establish a Commissioner for Parliamentary Standards as an independent role to consider the conduct of MPs.
Update: In July 2023 RNZ reported that Debbie Francis has re-examined if there was less bullying and harassment in Parliament since her inquiry, and she has repoted back that the environment has improved.
Update: Research published in 2024 found that 98% of surveyed MPs reported harassment and threats, with increases in online threats and misogyny. The article, Stalking, harassment, gendered abuse, and violence towards politicians in the COVID-19 pandemic and recovery era (2024), also reported that "Women [parliamentarians] were at significantly higher risk of certain types of social media harassment including gendered abuse, sexualised comments, threat of sexual violence, and threats toward their family." See related media below for more information.
Background information
In November 2018, Speaker of the House Trevor Mallard announced an independent external review into bullying and harassment of staff at Parliament. Terms of reference and frequently asked questions are on the Parliamentary website.
For support
Current and former employees can call 0800 PP ASSIST (0800 772 774).
To talk to a trained specialist in sexual violence, contact Safe to Talk | Kōrero mai ka ora on 0800 044334 or txt 4334.
Related news
Prior to the release of the report, Stuff reported that a number of Parliamentary Services staff have reported experiences with bullying and harassment.
The National Party completed a separate review of its culture. The party waited to release the results until the report from the Parliamentary inquiry was released. The National Party has now released a draft Code of Conduct and recommendations from their health and safety review which looked at "... ensuring our current Party policies continued to reflect best practice and provide advice on any improvements that could be made."
National Party President Peter Goodfellow said "While our review confirms we have a comprehensive Health and Safety Policy in place, there are a few small helpful changes we can make to ensure alignment with best practice, and our Board of Directors have accepted all of the recommendations made." National Party Leader Simon Bridges launched the independent review following allegations of bullying, intimidation and sexual harassment.
The New Zealand chapter of the cross-party Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians surveyed female MPs about their experiences of sexism and sexual harassment. One News reported findings from the survey that 44% of women who responded had experienced psychological violence and that 86% didn't report the abuse because they did not know where to go for help, did not want to relive the event or decided to put up with the abuse.
Media outlet Stuff also reported that women's experiences included inappropriate touching at public meetings, death and rape threats from constituents, and sexist and humiliating comments in work environments including from other Members of Parliament. In response to the survey findings, Former MP and Human Rights Commissioner Dr Jackie Blue called for a code of conduct to address the culture of sexism and bullying in Parliament.
Golriz Ghahraman, the first person from a refugee background to be elected to the New Zealand Parliament, spoke at a public panel about her experiences of threats and harassment including racism. She called for structural change saying:
"Some of our messages have to change when we talk to women about political participation. We tell them often to ‘lean in’, to just put themselves forward, to smash that glass ceiling, and I don’t think it’s safe in a lot of circumstances to keep telling women as individuals to do that.
... We have to change the system and we have to change the culture that is the barrier to women putting themselves forward. Of course, we have to encourage each other and we have to stand with each other as we do more and more put ourselves forward, but that can’t be the only thing."
Stuff reported the State Services Commission has been working to establish a new set of standards to address workplace bullying in government agencies.
Media has continued to highlight ongoing reports of sexual harassment and assault in workplaces including other government agencies as well as universities and sporting organisations around the country.
Related media
Parliament’s Complaint Commissioner: No complaints, no problem?, The Press, 06.09.2024
Access to Parliament to be cut down in wake of growing MP abuse, Stuff, 18.04.2024
Female MPs at higher risk of abuse: study, Otago Daily Times, 18.04.2024
Abuse of MPs increased to 98% in 2022 - study, RNZ, 17.04.2024
MPs turn to private security companies as ‘disturbing’ abuse ramps up, Stuff, 17.04.2024
Parliament culture report ignores Māori issues, Waatea News, 04.08.2023
Parliament culture report fails Te Tiriti o Waitangi test, Waatea News, 01.08.2023
Debbie Francis called back to Parliament to look at culture, RNZ, 14.10.2022
Bullying and harassment in Parliament - one year on, Newsroom, 07.07.2020
$130k paid out to ministerial staff after relationship 'breakdown', RNZ, 07.08.2019
Details of employment disputes between MPs and staffers released, Radio NZ, 10.06.2019
Teuila Fuatai: Racism an ugly side of parliamentary culture, NZ Herald, 28.05.2019
Health and Disability Commissioner Anthony Hill has released a report examining a District Health Board (DHB) response to a child who presented multiple times to hospital with indications of possible non-accidental injury. Following discharge, the child sustained further injuries and died.
In the report (16HDC00134), the Commissioner found the DHB had adequate information to diagnose the child's leg fracture and non-accidental injuries earlier, "... but a series of failings in assessment, communication, documentation, and coordination of care, and a failure to adhere to policies and procedures prevented this from occurring."
He found that the "DHB’s systems did not encompass an adequate safeguard" and "that the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates a systemic failing on the part of the DHB."
The 16 month old child was brought to the hospital by his mother four times. During the visits, the mother informed staff the child's father was in prison for domestic violence with a "restraining/parenting order" and that her current partner was on home detention for assault and had permission to be in their home.
The Commissioner highlighted that the DHB’s Partner Abuse Screening policy recommends screening for family violence at all Emergency Department and Paediatric Department presentations. However, screening and a Paediatric Nursing Assessment Form were only completed on the forth visit. The screen was negative and the social history was found to be incomplete.
The Commissioner's report also noted that "Several important policies and procedures concerning non-accidental injury were in place, but were not followed." One was not able to be followed due to inadequate staffing levels. During the investigation, members of the medical team stated they considered non-accidental injury as a possible risk in the first three visits however this was not documented. At the third visit the child was discharged before the clinician responsible for his care completed a Child Protection Assessment.
At the forth visit, when additional injuries were noted (at a different hospital), an Unexplained Injury Process was initiated, a Report of Concern was sent to Oranga Tamariki - Ministry for Children and a referral was made to the Child Protection Team. This was communicated to New Zealand Police and the Social Work Team at the original hospital. The child was transferred back to the original hospital, but was ultimately discharged without the knowledge of the clinician who was responsible for his care and before safety planning was done.
The Commissioner highlighted that a national Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Oranga Tamariki - Ministry for Children, Police, and DHBs relating to children who are admitted with suspected or confirmed abuse or neglect was not followed. Staff were not made aware of the MOU. The MOU requires "All children admitted with suspected or confirmed abuse or neglect will have a Multi-Agency Safety Plan in place prior to discharge from hospital. [Oranga Tamariki] have a key responsibility for the development and implementation of this plan."
The Commissioner went on to write "Whilst I am concerned that a number of policies were not followed by staff, I am also concerned that the DHB did not have robust systems in place to ensure that these policies could be followed."
In conclusion, the Commissioner writes:
"Master A’s care demonstrates the challenges clinicians face when diagnosing nonaccidental injuries. These challenges could have been addressed by more rigorous analysis, particularly given circumstances where suspicion of inflicted injury should have been expressly explored, policies and procedures followed, and effective communication and documentation carried out.
In my view, the DHB failed to provide services to Master A with reasonable care and skill for the following reasons:
- The diagnosis of non-accidental injury was not considered adequately across multiple presentations to hospital, resulting in a delayed diagnosis. This was reflected in poor documentation of social history, cause of injury, and family violence screening.
- The important policies and procedures around family violence screening and nonaccidental injury were not followed by numerous staff. Moreover, the DHB did not have robust systems in place to ensure that the policies could be followed.
Furthermore, the DHB failed to ensure quality and continuity of services for the following reasons:
- The inadequate documentation led to an incomplete clinical picture being passed on from team to team, and this contributed to a delay in Master A’s diagnosis.
- Master A’s journey through the Paediatric, Orthopaedic, and Radiology teams was inadequate, and included two inappropriate discharges from hospital and delayed reporting of his skeletal survey.
Across all disciplines, my experts have advised me that there were systemic failings in the care provided to Master A within teams, and across services. Dr Rowan concluded:
'[T]he over-riding finding from the information given is that there was a lack of consideration of the diagnosis of non-accidental injury. The lack of consideration was systemic across all services.'
Similarly, Dr Metcalfe advised that 'the systemic issues were more to blame than any one individual'. Dr Tuck also advised that 'there is absolutely no doubt that the system let this child down from first to last presentation', and he concluded that the standard of care provided to Master A was 'significantly below' accepted standards.
Having considered the information gathered and the advice from my experts, the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates a systemic failing on the part of the DHB. For the reasons outlined above, I find that the DHB failed to provide services to Master A with reasonable care and skill, and breached Right 4(1) of the Code [Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights]. The DHB also failed to ensure cooperation among providers to ensure quality and continuity of services, and breached Right 4(5) of the Code."
The Health and Disability Commissioner lists six recommendations for the DHB:
- Provide a written letter of apology to the child's family
- Report back on the DHB's review of medical staffing levels and rostering practices in the Paediatric and Radiology departments
- Audit the standard of documentation for child presentations including family violence screening and social history
- Audit the reporting timeframes of paediatric skeletal surveys
- Report back on the protocol being developed around hi-tech imaging requests for children under the age of 12 years
- Share the Commissioner's report with clinical teams across all hospitals within the DHB and nationally.
The DHB has completed two internal reviews of this case including a Serious Adverse Event Report (SAER). The DHB advised the Commissioner that all actions had been completed from this report with the exception of two areas: (1) a follow-up multi-agency meeting with Police and Ministry for Children - Oranga Tamariki and (2) a protocol for hi-tech imaging requests for children under the age of 12. The Commissioner endorsed the SAER findings and recommended the DHB follow up with Oranga Tamariki - Ministry for Children and Police regarding the multi-agency meeting. The DHB advised Police wished to wait until a Coroner’s inquest is complete.
The Commissioner has referred the DHB to the Director of Proceedings to decide whether any proceedings should be taken.
For more information listen to interviews on Radio NZ with Health and Disability Commissioner Anthony Hill and Children's Commissioner Andrew Becroft.
Related news
Minister for Social Development, Carmel Sepuloni recently announced changes to government oversight of the children’s system (particularly children in state care). The State Services Commission has released four Aide-Memoires related to oversight of the children's system.
Media outlet Newsroom recently reported the story of a mother, her whānau, Māori midwives and others challenging Oranga Tamariki and police efforts to uplift a newborn baby in Hawkes Bay Hospital. Oranga Tamariki said concerns included family violence by the child's father. The whānau, midwives and iwi eventually negotiated with police and Oranga Tamariki to allow the mother and child to stay together in a supported environment until a court hearing in June. This followed previous criticism of increasing and disproportionate uplifts of Māori children. See further commentary in the related media below.
A community hui was recently held to address concerns from parents and whānau about Oranga Tamariki's uplifting of children.
Related media
Yes, we are the Stolen Generations, Newsroom, 12.06.2019
Oranga Tamariki taking Newsroom to court, Newsroom, 12.06.2019
The midwife fighting for her patients’ babies, Newsroom, 12.06.2019
DHB chairman: Outspoken member has breached code of conduct, NZ Herald [Premium], 12.06.2019
Baby uplift case breached legal processes, Newsroom, 11.06.2019
NZ’s own ‘taken generation’, Newsroom, 11.06.2019
Opinion: Hinemoa Elder, Oranga Tamariki is doing more harm than good, Stuff, 19.05.2019
Oranga Tamariki isn't 'snatching babies' - Children's Minister Tracey Martin, Newshub, 18.05.2019
Opinion: Jacoby Poulain: Hawke's Bay DHB 'failed significantly' in its duty, NZ Herald, 14.05.2019
Parents demand more robust assessments from Oranga Tamariki, Māori Television, 13.05.2019
Call for investigation over attempt to remove baby from hospital, Radio NZ, 13.05.2019
Culture change missing from Oranga Tamariki, Waatea News, 13.05.2019
‘Our problem, our solution, our way’, Newsroom, 10.05.2019
Oranga Tamariki accused of bullying, racism over removal of baby, Radio NZ, 10.05.2019
Toddler death: Health Minister expects DHB to review policies, NZ Herald, 07.05.2019
Toddler dies after hospital staff failed three times to identify possible abuse, Stuff, 06.05.2019
Child, Youth and Family 'failings' exposed over Southland toddler's death, Stuff, 13.06.2017
Faces of Innocents: The man who was allowed in to kill, Stuff, 24.07.2016
The Government has announced a family violence and sexual violence package worth $320 million, as part of its Wellbeing Budget 2019.
The package was developed collaboratively across 8 votes involving 10 agencies.
The family violence and sexual violence package comprises initiatives across five broad areas.
These are summarised in the Beehive release:
- “Preventing family violence and sexual violence [$47.8 million over 4 years]
- Safe, consistent and effective responses to family violence in every community [$84.3 million over 4 years]
- Expanding essential specialist sexual violence services: moving towards fully funding services [$131.1 million over 4 years]
- Reforming the criminal justice system to better respond to victims of sexual violence. [$37.8 million over 4 years]
- Strengthening system leadership and supporting new ways of working [$20.0 million over 4 years]
- The total monetary value of the package is $320 million (comprising new operating funding of $311.4 million, and $9.5 million of capital funding).”
Further detail on the package is available in the summary Family Violence and Sexual Violence Package: Breaking the cycle of family and sexual violence, on the Ministry of Justice website.
The Ministry of Social Development (MSD) also provides further detail in a special Budget edition of their Family Violence and Sexual Violence Service Provider Update. Also see the MSD media announcement and Budget 2019 Fact Sheets.
Making the announcement, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Parliamentary Under-Secretary Jan Logie said the Government was delivering the "largest ever investment in family and sexual violence and support services." Jacinda Ardern said:
“Wellbeing means being safe and free from violence. That is why this package is such a significant cornerstone of the Wellbeing Budget.
My goal has always been for New Zealand to be the best place in the world to be a child and that means supporting parents and communities to ensure children grow up in secure homes free from violence.”
For responses to the announcement, see the media list below.
The full Wellbeing Budget will be delivered on 30 May 2019.
Related news
The Joint Venture have released a snapshot, Integrated Safety Response (ISR) evaluation: emerging findings. An evaluation of ISR is currently being carried out "by a kaupapa Māori team and a research team led by Dr Elaine Mossman." The final evaluation is due in mid-2019. The snapshot provides key emerging findings to date. The snapshot says "The emerging findings show that the ISR is making a positive difference for many families and whānau. The evaluation also identifies opportunities that build on current results."
The first evaluation of ISR was published in 2017.
Media
More men needed to help combat domestic violence, RNZ, 05.08.2019
Rangatiratanga key to kaupapa funding, Waatea News, 23.05.2019
Funding boost creates first sexual violence services for ethnic communities, Stuff, 22.05.2019
Funding pledge for safer whānau, Ten One Magazine, NZ Police, 20.05.2019
Women's Refuge hails new Budget as historic step against domestic violence, Newshub, 20.05.2019
$320m package to tackle family and sexual violence 'a good foundation', Radio NZ, 20.05.2019
Sexual Violence Initiative Welcomed, Press Release: TOAH-NNEST, Scoop, 20.05.19
No simple solution to NZ's family violence crisis - HELP director, NewstalkZB, 20.05.2019
New Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission likely to be announced, NZ Herald [premium], 20.05.2019
Finally, relief for survivors of sexual violence - but caution remains, Stuff, 19.05.2019
Le Va has launched a new e-learning module on respectful relationships for Pasifika young people. The module has been launched in time for Youth Week, which runs from 18 - 26 May 2019.
The module is part of Le Va's violence prevention programme Atu-Mai. Respectful Relationships is the second e-learning module in the programme. The first part focuses on Respectful Partner Relationships. It covers healthy partner relationships, unhealthy and abusive partner relationships and relationship tools. It involves a number of brief videos along with a quiz to test your knowledge. The other parts of this module are still being developed. They cover relationships and culture, consent and being an 'upstander.'
The first module, I Am, was released when the Atu-Mai programme was launched in 2018. This module focuses on strengthening self-worth through culture. This includes exploring Pasifika cultural values and applying them in a modern world.
The third module, Intergenerational Communication, will focus on how to navigate respecting elders and getting support from family. This module is still being developed.
To access the online learning modules, you need to create a profile and log in. It is free to create a profile and to complete the modules.
Atu-Mai is a five year national programme focused on strengthening Pasifika communities by developing confident and resilient Pasifika young people. The programme is designed to equip Pasifika young people and their families with the knowledge and tools to live violence-free. ACC partnered with and funded Le Va to develop and implement the programme.
For more information about the Atu-Mai programme see Le Va's work on violence prevention. Also see our previous story National violence prevention programme for Pasifika young people launched.
For more information about Youth Week, see Ara Taiohi, the peak body for youth development in Aotearoa New Zealand.
Related news
The Ministry of Social Development (MSD) has announced it will develop a Pacific Strategy and Action Plan. The aim of the plan is to improve the overall wellbeing of Pacific families and communities. Details about the timeline and consultation process are still to be set. To stay up to date with news from MSD, sign up for their newsletter Kotahitanga.
Related media
Solomon Islands counts cost of domestic and sexual violence, Radio NZ, 27.03.2019
New Study Shows High Cost of Domestic and Sexual Violence [Solomon Islands], Press Release: International Finance Corporation, Scoop, 26.03.2019 (see the full report)
The Government has released a Cabinet Paper and two Cabinet Minutes that outline how the government plans to respond to the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Historical Abuse in State Care and in the Care of Faith-based Institutions │ Te Kōmihana Karauna mō ngā Tūkino o Mua ki te Hunga i Tiakina e te Kāwanatanga i Tiakina hoki e ngā Whare o te Whakapono.
Minister of State Services, Chris Hipkins, is responsible for leading the Crown’s response to the inquiry and released the Cabinet Paper, Proposed Strategic Approach to Guide the Crown Engagement with and Response to, The Royal Commission of Inquiry into Historical Abuse in State Care and in the Care of Faith-Based Institutions (2019).
The Cabinet Minutes include the decisions of Cabinet and the Cabinet Social Wellbeing Committee in support of the proposal.
“Eleven government agencies are involved in responding to the inquiry. Given the scale and the significance, Cabinet has set out how Government agencies will engage with the Royal Commission and survivors.”
The Cabinet Paper outlines the focus and structure of the Crown response and identifies key issues. It states that the Crown response needs to be flexible and ongoing because the inquiry will produce recommendations throughout the process as well as the final report:
"Firstly, that government agencies will need to be prepared to engage and respond (including, with information and advice about current practices) for the duration of the inquiry rather than waiting to respond to a final report at the end."
The Cabinet Paper also notes that the Crown response needs to keep enough distance from the inquiry to ensure it remains independent.
The Cabinet Paper outlines six outcomes and six principles. The outcomes are intended to reflect what is most important to survivors:
- Survivors are heard and they feel heard
- Harm is acknowledged (recognition and reconciliation)
- An improved government care system
- This type of harm never happens again
- Māori experiences, and their impacts, are recognised and respected
- Disabled people's experiences, and their impacts, are recognised and respected.
The principles are intended to acknowledge the harm experienced by individuals, whānau and communities. The Cabinet Paper states: "... the principles show our intent to behave with compassion and to be open, transparent and to learn from the Royal Commission and survivors." The principles are:
- "Manaakitanga: The Crown recognises that people and their experiences are at the heart of this issue and they will be treated with humanity, respect and responsible caring that upholds the mana of those involved.
- Openness: That government should be honest and sincere in all its dealings with the Royal Commission and the survivor community. We should be open to receiving, considering and acting on new ideas, and willing to reconsider how we do things currently and how we have done things in the past.
- Transparency: Access should be available to knowledge and information held by the Crown as much as possible [5] and the Crown should proactively share any relevant information, including information about past actions and current processes. This principle must be balanced with manaakitanga, as care should be taken when releasing information that its release does not cause further harm to survivors.
- Learning: Crown agencies should listen and learn from the Royal Commission and the survivor community as the inquiry progresses, in ways that are both deliberate and reflective, and use that information to change current systems, where relevant.
- Cross-agency alignment and ownership: The Crown will take a ‘whole of government’ ownership of the response, align activities and coordinate engagement with the Royal Commission. Oversight from the Social Wellbeing Board and sponsorship from a subgroup of Chief Executives will support this.
- Meeting our obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi: The Crown response needs to recognise the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, meet Treaty obligations as they apply and build a stronger Māori-Crown relationship through the way we operate and behave."
Chris Hipkins writes in the Cabinet Paper that:
"The Crown is not always seen to be acting in alignment with the principles, so we will need to take a range of actions to actively demonstrate our commitment to them. I have asked officials to consider what these actions might involve and report back to this Committee. This includes examining some aspects of existing government business which may not initially be obvious, but where the implications of the principles need to be considered. The Crown’s current approach to dispute resolution and litigation from people who claim they were abused in state care is one area of work that should be considered in light of the proposed principles."
He also writes:
"In the press release that accompanies the release of this paper, I intend to make it clear that I expect the Royal Commission to have a significant impact on State agencies that care for children and vulnerable adults, and that I do not expect those agencies to be complacent about the impact of this work."
The Cabinet Paper highlights several key issues including a need for the Crown's response to acknowledge the disproportionate numbers of Māori previously and currently in the government care system, stating "A key question for Māori will be how this overrepresentation happened - where it began and what the causes were." The Cabinet Paper also acknowledges that people with disabilities and mental illness, and Pacific people were disproportionately affected.
Chris Hipkins has also proposed that the government should consider providing support for Crown entities and NGOs to participate in the inquiry process.
The Cabinet Paper provides a detailed overview of the governance and management structure for the Crown Response, noting:
"Sponsoring oversight is provided by a sub-set of five Chief Executives from the Social Wellbeing Board, with decisions about resourcing, risks and the work programme handled by an Interagency Group of senior managers from relevant agencies."
It goes on to state that "A set of individual work-streams will form the Crown response, with cross-agency working groups driving particular aspects of the work." Work is already underway to begin the Crown response. Funding has been requested to support the Crown response and is expected to be announced in the upcoming Budget 2019.
The Royal Commission of Inquiry welcomed the Government’s approach and confirmed the Commission could issue recommendations at any time.
Update: The Ministry of Social Development announced that a Crown secretariat has been set up to coordinate and align the Crown’s engagement across and between agencies for the Royal Commission of Inquiry.
Update: The Crown has announced the new strategy for resolving historical claims of abuse in state care.
Related news
The Ministry of Social Development has been working on revising the process for responding to claims of historic abuse in state care.
Media outlet Newsroom recently reported the story of a mother, her whānau, Māori midwives and others challenging Oranga Tamariki and police efforts to uplift a newborn baby in Hawkes Bay Hospital. Oranga Tamariki said concerns included family violence by the child's father. The whānau, midwives and iwi eventually negotiated with police and Oranga Tamariki to allow the mother and child to stay together in a supported environment until a court hearing in June. This followed previous criticism of increasing and disproportionate uplifts of Māori children. See further commentary in the related media below.
Update: Newsroom has released a documentary about their investigation into the uplifting of children by Oranga Tamariki.
A community hui was recently held to address concerns from parents and whānau about Oranga Tamariki's uplifting of children.
Minister for Social Development, Carmel Sepuloni has recently announced changes to government oversight of the children’s system (particularly children in state care).
Related media
Crown open to iwi input to state care abuse fix, Waatea News, 17.12.2019
Lawyer loses confidence in state care abuse inquiry, Radio NZ, 10.06.2019
Royal Commission’s ‘mock’ sessions with survivors, Newsroom, 10.06.2019
Royal Commission denies retraumatising 'mock' hearings, Radio NZ, 10.06.2019
Opinion: Hinemoa Elder, Oranga Tamariki is doing more harm than good, Stuff, 19.05.2019
'Not one more baby': Māori leaders call for change at Oranga Tamariki, Newshub, 19.05.2019
Oranga Tamariki's removal of babies 'dehumanising', Newshub, 19.05.2019
Oranga Tamariki isn't 'snatching babies' - Children's Minister Tracey Martin, Newshub, 18.05.2019
Historic child abuse: Should the state be allowed to investigate itself?, NZ Herald, 16.05.2019
Parents demand more robust assessments from Oranga Tamariki, Māori Television, 13.05.2019
Call for investigation over attempt to remove baby from hospital, Radio NZ, 13.05.2019
Culture change missing from Oranga Tamariki, Waatea News, 13.05.2019
Families whose kids were taken by Oranga Tamariki gather for hui, Newshub, 12.05.2019
Children's Comissioner says Oranga Tamariki approach must change, Radio NZ, 11.05.2019
Racist uplift practice cause for alarm, Newsroom, 10.05.2019
Baby stand off reveals wider problem, Waatea News, 10.05.2019
Baby grab shows need for Māori solutions, Waatea News, 10.05.2019
‘Our problem, our solution, our way’, Newsroom, 10.05.2019
Oranga Tamariki accused of bullying, racism over removal of baby, Radio NZ, 10.05.2019
Urgent call for Oranga Tamariki accountability, Press Release: Louise Hutchinson, Scoop, 10.05.2019
Child stealing undermining communities, Waatea News, 09.05.2019
He Oranga Tamariki CEO Must Go, Press Release: Leonie Pihama, Scoop, 09.05.2019
ActionStation has published a report exploring whether government funding for sexual violence services is adequate.
In the lead up to the Government's May 2019 Budget announcement, the report, For the Wellbeing of New Zealanders: An Urgent Call for Full Funding for Sexual Violence Prevention & Support Services (2019), calls on the government to significantly increase funding for sexual violence prevention, education, and survivor support services.
The report notes:
- "Successive governments have neglected sexual violence prevention and support services, and New Zealanders continue to suffer as a result;
- Government underfunding of sexual violence prevention and support services is hurting all of our communities, especially Māori, LGBTIQ folk, and our migrant and refugee whānau;
- Fully funding specialist sexual violence prevention and support agencies is crucial to supporting the mental health of young New Zealanders;
- New Zealanders want the government to do more to end sexual and domestic violence and have demonstrated this desire over and over again;
- Numerous government reports have acknowledged the damage of underfunding and called for urgent change;
- Intimate partner violence and child abuse currently costs New Zealand between $1.4 billion and $7 billion over one year;
- Limited and unstable government funding means services are stretched, stressed and overrun;
- People who need help are being put on long waiting lists. Support agencies are left having to make hard choices about who to help first;
- Prior to colonisation, sexual violence was rare within Māori communities. Now it is one of the leading causes of trauma among Māori women. Government underfunding of Kaupapa Māori services is creating further harm;
- People from migrant and refugee backgrounds need support from people who understand their culture yet specialist cultural services struggle to get by;
- Male survivors face challenges to accessing support, and need more support;
- People from rainbow communities need specialist services. It saves lives;
- Government underfunding is hindering healing and restoration;
- The government needs to ensure best-practice education for sexuality, healthy relationships and consent in all schools."
The report is based on:
- An analysis of recent government inquiries into the sexual violence sector;
- A review of existing community research;
- 11 in-depth interviews with a diverse range people who work in the sexual violence sector;
- An analysis of annual financial reports of 38 sexual violence support and intervention agencies.
For the sample of 38 agencies, government contracts covered a total of $24 million. The total expenditure of agencies was $31 million, leaving a gap between contract levels and true cost of running services of $7 million. As result of the inadequate funding, people often wait months for services.
The report notes that inquiries and reports from the Social Services Select Committee, Law Commission, Ministry of Social Development, Taskforce for Action on Sexual Violence and Ministry for Women's Affairs between 2009 and 2015 have all identified insufficient funding as a significant issue for effective services and prevention. It also notes sexual violence has previously been estimated to cost New Zealanders $1.8 billion per year. Treasury estimated that it is the most expensive of all crimes, primarily reflecting the impact on victims.
ActionStation's primary recommendation is for the government to "significantly increase funding to sexual violence prevention, education, and survivor support in the forthcoming budget due for release in May." Its other four recommendations are:
- "All secondary, primary and ECE schools to become champions of healthy relationships and consent.
- Nationwide coverage of Kaupapa Māori specialist services.
- Culturally appropriate, rainbow specialist and accessible services available to all who need them.
- More funding for self-referral services for people at risk of causing sexual harm, and those who have already harmed and want to change their behaviour."
The report includes case studies and comments from providers working in the sexual violence sector. See additional commentary in the media links below.
Related news
Brenda Pilott, National Manager for Social Service Providers Aotearoa, has written a piece highlighting the "persistent and systemic under-funding of the [social services] sector. And that is the responsibility of the government agencies that contract for services at low or partial rates and ministers when they make Budget decisions."
Brenda Pilott writes,
"A quick glance at some key statistics will show you the community sector is characterised by low wages, low levels of unionisation, few collective agreements, high rates of employment relationship difficulties, problems in recruitment. The work is often highly stressful, and access to support, supervision and training can be limited.
... It’s a difficult picture, but there is cause for optimism. And the solutions aren’t actually that difficult:
- Funding from government agencies that reflect the full cost of delivery – fair funding.
- With fair funding, workers in the sector can get fair pay, that corresponds to the rates for similar jobs in the government sector. Industry agreements about wages would help.
- Workforce planning to improve the supply of qualified workers and to help match the profile of sector workers with those using our services.
- Better support for good governance and management.
- A more strongly unionised workforce."
SSPA has commissioned a study which will, later this year, reveal the true extent of that underfunding.
Related media
We Need To Talk About Sex In Schools, The Pantograph Punch, 28.05.2019
The Community Sector – a Worker’s Paradise? Brenda Pilott. Community Scoop, 01.05.2019
Underfunding crippling sexual violence help, Waatea News, 30.04.2019
Report criticises Govt underfunding of sexual violence support and prevention, Stuff, 30.04.2019
The final report from the Government commissioned Welfare Expert Advisory Group (WEAG) has been published.
The report, Whakamana Tāngata: Restoring Dignity to Social Security in New Zealand (Welfare Expert Advisory Group, 2019), makes 42 recommendations.
WEAG reports the current system is no longer fit for purpose:
"The current social security system was set up in a different time and no longer meets the needs of those it was designed to support. Successive governments have implemented changes to the system with intended and unintended consequences. Agreement is near universal that the benefit and tax credit systems are unmanageably complex. The level of financial support is now so low that too many New Zealanders are living in desperate situations. Urgent and fundamental change is needed." (p.5)
WEAG's recommendations are designed to "... enable the social security system to serve its most fundamental functions but to move beyond a ‘safety net’ to ‘whakamana tāngata’ – restoring dignity to people so they can participate meaningfully with their families and communities." (p.4)
WEAG finds "The Government must urgently increase the incomes of people in receipt of a benefit and in low-wage work and maintain these increases over time so that they keep pace with the incomes of the rest of the community." (p.7)
Current eligibility rules for welfare support also reflect an outdated view of New Zealand families, with families, and arrangements for the care of children, being more diverse and fluid than in the past.
The experience of using the welfare system is "unsatisfactory and damaging for too many of the highest need and poorest people. We heard overwhelmingly during our consultation that the system diminishes trust, causes anger and resentment, and contributes to toxic levels of stress." (p.6)
WEAG expect significant gains in wellbeing from their recommended package of changes, including "fiscal savings from lower health and justice costs in the longer term and productivity gains from a more skilled workforce. Significant gains beyond the financial are also to be expected – gains in self-esteem and the quality of relationships." (p.8)
Many organisations and advocates have welcomed the report's recommendations and called for government action including Barnardos, New Zealand Council of Trade Unions, Public Service Association, South Island Whānau Ora commissioning agency Te Pūtahitanga, Salvation Army, New Zealand Council of Christian Social Services and the Child Poverty Action Group. Senior associate at the Institute for Governance and Policy Studies Max Rashbrooke welcomed the report's shift to supporting rather than punishing people in need.
In addition to the full report, the WEAG has published an executive summary, fact sheets, background papers and evidence briefs. Several documents are available in a range of languages and formats.
Government response
In response to the report and recommendations, the Government has announced three actions as part of a first phase. These include:
- repealing Section 192 (formerly known as Section 70A) which imposes benefit sanctions (currently $28 per week) when a child’s father is not declared to the government
- lifting abatement thresholds for people who work and receive benefits in line with minimum wage increases
- increasing the number of frontline staff by 263.
The Government estimates that the combined investment of these three pre-budget announcements is $286.8 million over the next four years. The first two of these actions are planned to come into effect on 1 April 2020.
In relation to the rest of recommendations from the report, Minister for Social Development Carmel Sepuloni said:
“The Government can’t deliver on every recommendation at once. We are taking a balanced approach and are committed to delivering change over the longer term and prioritising areas like housing and mental health which impact on all New Zealanders but especially those in the welfare system.
We have decided not to implement the report’s recommendations to increase benefit levels by up to 47% immediately. As we have said, we will be looking at a staged implementation of the report. There are a range of ways to improve people’s financial wellbeing and reduce the number of people on benefits that live in poverty, in line with our commitment to reduce the overall rates of child poverty in New Zealand, and we will be looking at these over the coming years."
Reaction to Government response
Many advocates have welcomed the changes but criticised the limited and delayed action.
The Child Poverty Action Group said the Government announcements "... signaled a start, but were unremarkable, and did not signal the courageous, transformational change that CPAG and many others had hoped for from a 'Wellbeing Budget'."
The Children's Commissioner Andrew Becroft commented on Twitter that he was "terribly disappointed." He said, "We were hoping for transformative change but so far a remarkably timid response. Hoping for better in the Budget."
Auckland Action Against Poverty "condemned" the Government's lack of action, highlighting:
"Removing sanctions on sole mothers and changing the abatement rate were all things that Government parties had agreed on when in opposition and could have acted on earlier in the term. The point of commissioning a panel of experts to come with further recommendations was so that the Government could do a wider overhaul. ... If the Government is serious about ending child poverty it will implement the recommendations of the Welfare Expert Advisory Group within this term."
Shine welcomed the announcement about removing the sanction on sole mothers, saying it could mean the difference between a woman being able to leave a violent relationship or not. Auckland Action Against Poverty (AAAP) also welcomed the change and called on the Government to backpay women who have been sanctioned, as well as to act quickly to remove all the other benefit sanctions outlined by WEAG.
In an interview on One News, Dr Ganesh Nana, a member of WEAG, said he was "disappointed" in the immediate response but was hoping for additional announcements with Budget 2019.
Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said during her post-Cabinet press conference: "There will always be those who ask us to move faster and to make significant changes at a more rapid pace." She went on to recap other actions the Government has taken to address poverty including the Families Package and efforts to change the Work and Income culture. Also see the transcript from Newshub's interview with Carmel Sepuloni responding to questions about the phased approach, timeline and possible announcements in the 2019 Budget.
Related news
The Ministry of Social Development and Oranga Tamariki - Ministry for Children have published two evidence briefs exploring the link between child protection and welfare policies, including sanctions.
How do welfare and tax settings affect children’s involvement with child protective services? (Oranga Tamariki Evidence Centre, 2019) looked at previous welfare and tax policy studies to examine links between income and child maltreatment. It aimed to inform discussions on welfare policy settings. The brief states:
"A number of the studies described in this brief have found a significant relationship between low income and neglect, but the link with physical abuse or other types of abuse is less clear. Nevertheless, it is important to note that the majority of families, whether living with income poverty or not, do not harm their children – either through neglect or other forms of harm."
Key findings include:
- "Experimental and quasi-experimental studies show that welfare policies that lower incomes through sanctions or benefit limits can increase rates of child neglect and entry into out-of-home care.
- Conversely, increasing incomes for families receiving a benefit or on a low income can reduce involvement with child protective services, child neglect, and entry into care. Policies that increase incomes can also lead to improved child behavioural and developmental outcomes.
- Investment in financial supports for families experiencing material or financial hardship can substantially reduce downstream care and protection related service costs."
Section 70A and Children (Oranga Tamariki Evidence Centre, 2019) looked at how children are affected by reductions in benefit payments under Section 70A and what the impact would be if this section was removed. The researchers found that these benefit reductions disproportionately affect children already at high risk of persistent poverty and adverse childhood experiences. Children affected by these sanctions were more likely to come to the attention of the care and protection system.
Update: The Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) has published a briefing paper that compares some of the WEAG's main recommendations and compares them to actions that have been called for by a range of organisations.
Background information
For more information see our previous stories:
Government appoints expert panel to welfare review; welfare, poverty and violence
Consultation on welfare reforms; Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill passes
Calls for sanctions to be removed; committee report on Social Security Bill
Kathryn's Story: Report highlights violence, relationship status and benefit fraud
Related media
Where to next for dead welfare report?, Newsroom, 20.05.2019
Dole sanction delay 'prolonging something harmful to vulnerable families', Radio NZ, 15.05.2019
What I wish Sepuloni had said on welfare, Newsroom, 15.05.2019
No hope for progressive welfare reform from this government, The Spinoff, 06.05.2019
Intent good but pace slow on welfare reform, Waatea News, 06.05.2019
Opinion: Susan St John, I am not a conspiracy theorist but……, The Daily Blog, 06.05.2019
Pregnant by rape and forced to pay child support, Newshub, 04.05.2019
Welfare reform: Government announces law changes, Newshub, 03.05.2019
Welfare system report: Advocates hope for more funding, Radio NZ, 03.05.2019
Whakamana Tāngata report calls for welfare "overhaul", Māori Television, 03.05.2019
The Ministry of Social Development's (MSD) latest email update for family violence and sexual violence service providers covers a number of areas of work.
You can view the updates online and subscribe to receive them to your inbox.
The May 2019 update includes:
- Statistics for Safe to talk / Kōrero mai ka ora in the first year
- Whānau Resilience shortlisting completed
- Work to strengthen family violence crisis services
- Update on project to strengthen sexual violence sector support
- Early findings of analysis of sexual violence services
Read all past updates and sign up to receive future updates on the MSD website.
For questions about sexual violence service development email CI_Sexual_Violence_Services@msd.govt.nz and about the family violence work programme contact Family_Violence_CPP@msd.govt.nz.
Related news
No results found.
Please try different keywords or filter options.
Subscribe to our Pānui and our News and Events mailing lists
Never miss an update! Receive the latest news and event information directly to your inbox.