Peters alleges cover-up at Maori Affairs Dept

Press, 31 January 1989, Page 6

Peters alleges cover-up at Maori Affairs Dept

By

PATTRICK SMELLIE

in Wellington ■Accusations of a cover-up, incompetence and potential corruption in the housing division of the Maori Affairs Department were levelled last evening by the Opposition spokesman on Maori Affairs, Mr Winston Peters. He accused the Minister of Maori Affairs, Mr Wetere, of hiding behind the Official Information Act, and called for his immediate resignation. At issue is Mr Wetere’s deletion of parts of a damning audit report into the department’s Auckland Maori housing division and carpentry’ training scheme (C.T.S.). The edited report was released to the news media last month, with deletions justified on the basis that they were protecting “the names of clients and officers and anything else which may tend to identify clients.” But Mr Peters has obtained an unexpurgated copy of the report, and is asserting many of the deletions — including the

unacknowledged ommission of two pages of the report — have nothing to do with protecting identities. “The deletions were clearly made from one motive,” he said. "To protect the Minister and his department.” “All parts that identify wanton mismanagement, profiteering, wastage of taxpayers’ money, and the final judgment that the housing programme is failing the Maori people, have been removed.” But even with the deletions the report is clear that last year the housing division was in crisis. In its edited form it still identifies understaffing, low staff morale, loss of systems and planning, poor training, and reveals that “it would appear that the department has not purchased a section for straight Maori housing within the last two years.” arrangements with builders who were also advising on the purchase of land for which they then submitted development plans.

The variable quality of workmanship was also identified in house construction projects undertaken through the C.T.S. The report also included a long list of recommended remedial measures. News media reports last month said many of these had now been acted on. Significant deletions identified by Mr Peters included: • Criticism that most building contracts were being negotiated with “a limited group of builders, despite criticisms and inferences that the building supervisors have been accepting backhanders.” • Many new homes built by the division were without standard insurance cover. • No register of sections’ locations was being kept. • Details of vandalism to specific properties because they had been uninhabited for a long time, and records showing many properties unoccupied. • Low productivity by C.T.S. gangs and the unusual decision to supply transport for the

gangs. • The complete omission of two pages on poor administration of the C.T.S. scheme and office dynamics in the division. The detailed critique of one house built under the C.T.S. scheme, labelled “a disgrace,” and “one of the roughest constructed dwellings we have ever seen” was also excised, while references to better-built houses were left in the report. Mr Wetere said last evening Mr Peters’ accusations were “absolutely absurd.” He said the deletions were warranted and suggested Mr Peters should have the decision reviewed by the Ombudsman. The audit had improved the running of the Auckland housing division, he said. A spokeswoman for the Ombudsman’s Office said the Official Information Act required Ministers to detail the section of the act they were invoking in order to withhold information. But there were no legal sanctions against a failure to do so, she said.