‘Frustration, bitterness’ with system

Press, 9 July 1986, Page 2

‘Frustration, bitterness’ with system

A picture of Maoridom “in crisis” is painted by the chairman of the Ministerial advisory committee, Mr John Rangihau.

“We have been disturbed at the extent to which social welfare institutions, and indeed the courts, have a clientele which is predominantly Maori,” he said. “We think that as a society we cannot survive much longer if we continue to ignore these facts and the situation which gave rise to them.” Although people were invited to talk about the work of the Social Welfare Department, discussions had invariably brought out equally grave concerns about the work of other Government departments. Mr Rangihau said there was no doubt that the young people who came to the attention of the police and the Social Welfare Department invariably brought with them histories of sub-standard housing, health deficiencies, abysmal education records, and an inability to break out of the ranks of the unemployed. Even though five members of the advisory committee had been Maoris, it had been greeted unsympathetically by Maoridom. There were deep feelings of bitterness and frustration with the system, but also an understanding that things were trying to be done. “It is a crisis and needs to be treated like other crises — floods and earthquakes,” Mr Rangihau said. All society had to take responsibility and pitch in. To redress the imbalances would require concerted action from all the agencies involved. The advisory committee had studied from a Maori perspective New Zealand’s history for the last 150 years. The picture was by no means encouraging. New Zealand had a long way to go before it could say it was grappling successfully with the implications of a multi-racial society. Mr Rangihau said there was institutional racism in the Social Welfare Department and in society itself. Problem areas identified included policy formation, service delivery, communication, racial imbalances in staffing, appointment, promotion, and training. Changes were essential and had to be made urgently.

The advisory committee had also studied policies and practices in social work and desirable changes to the Children and Young Persons legislation. Changes were needed here. They were also needed in the work of the courts, of policies

and practices for the fostering and care of Maori children, and of family case work for Maori clients. At the heart of the issue was a profound misunderstanding or ignorance of the place of the child in Maori society and its relationship with the whanau, hapu and iwi structures, Mr Rangihau said. As well as advocating changes within the Social Welfare Department, the advisory committee made many recommendations on tackling problems that arose from racist attitudes and deprivation.

Some of the main recommendations were:

Abolish the Social Security Commission and replace it with a Social Welfare Commission which would have Maori members; recognise Maori customary marriages; restructure the unemployment benefit; extend the child and orphans’ benefit provision where the care of Maori children is transferred from natural parents to grandparents, other relatives, or whanau members; and review the Children and Young Persons Act, 1974, to take into account the place of the child in Maori society.