Abuse in Care: Survivors experiences 'abhorrent' – Oranga Tamariki

Monday, 22 August 2022

State abuse survivor Keith Wiffin talks about what he wants to see from the latest round of hearings by the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care, which focus on government agency responses. (First published August 2022.)

Abuse survivors faced “unacceptable and abhorrent” experiences in state care, the chief executive of Oranga Tamariki says.

Te Hapimana Te Kani (Ngāti Porou, Te Aitanga a Mahaki, Tūhoe, Ngāti Maniapoto, Rongowhakaata), also known as Chappie Te Kani, took the stand today as part of the Royal Commission’s Abuse in Care inquiry – Institutional Response Hearing.

The scope of the hearings include the years between 1950 and 1999.

Te Kani was the first of several witnesses from Oranga Tamariki set to appear before the commission this week.

* Abuse in Care: Ministry of Education admits more effort needed to employ disabled and Deaf educators

* Abuse in Care: Ministry of Education not prepared to admit systemic racism

He was joined by the chief social worker Peter Whitcombe and the director of Transformation, Te Oranga o te Whānau at Oranga Tamariki, Frana Chase (Ngāti Hauā, Ngāti Tūwharetoa).

Oranga Tamariki chief executive Chappie Te Kani faced questions during the Royal Commission’s Abuse in Care inquiry.

Te Kani said the care and protection system had not always kept rangatahi safe and had failed to stop abuse and other forms of harm between 1950 and 1999.

“Many of the experiences we have heard from survivors are unacceptable and abhorrent by any objective standard in place at the time the events occurred, as well as by present day standards,” he said.

Te Kani acknowledged Pacific children in care did not always have adequate access to their language, culture, identity and community.

From left, Peter Whitcombe, Frana Chase and Chappie Te Kani, at the Abuse in Care Royal Commission of Inquiry.

He said the care and protection system did not meet the needs of disabled children and those with mental health needs.

During questioning, the commission counsel assist, Natalie Coates (Ngāti Awa), asked if Aotearoa should be consistently reflecting on colonisation.

Te Kani said it should, but refused to say if decolonisation was part of the solution to reduce high rates of tamariki Māori in state care.

His colleague, Frana Chase, said the ministry was working to decolonise through partnerships with whānau, hapū and iwi.

“So I’d say that yes, that is part of a decolonisation process that needs to happen to ensure that to the best of our ability that whānau, hapū and iwi are able to set their own rangatiratanga.”

Chief social worker Peter Whitcombe said colonisation and its impacts were still felt today, resulting in poverty and disconnection.

He said poverty was not purely economic, and could refer to the intergenerational trauma felt by parents and grandparents.

It could lead to poorer outcomes, giving rise to spaces where child harm could occur, Whitcombe said.

“I would also say that generational trauma is not just a Māori issue, but I want to frame it in terms of the colonisation history.”

“Add into that a layer of a foster care system that was bedded originally through orphanages, essentially a western foster care system that preferenced non-kin or stranger care.

'It was out of step, and it was individualistic, and it didn’t meet the needs of tamariki Māori.”

Coates later turned to the topic of structural racism and discrimination in the care and protection sector.

“Mr Te Kani, in your brief of evidence you reaffirmed the concession that was made in the [Waitangi] Tribunal that structural racism is a feature of the care system that has had adverse effects on Māori, whānau, hapū and iwi. Is that right?” she asked.

“Yes,” replied Te Kani.

Coates asked if Te Kani felt Pacific people had faced similar adverse effects, to which he replied there was structural racism towards Pacific people in care.

“And would you say that structural racism is part of the reason for the disproportionate number of Māori and Pacific peoples that we see in care?” Coates asked.

Ihorangi Reweti-Peters was not impressed by the evidence provided by Oranga Tamariki today.

“Yes,” responded Te Kani.

Coates queried how Oranga Tamariki defined structural racism based on previous comments made at the Waitangi Tribunal.

Te Kani said it was a recognition of policies, practices and legislative change reflecting broader public attitudes.

“The second component, which is important to note around structural racism, is a clear acknowledgement of where decision-making sits within government in relation to decisions about tamariki in care,” he said.

“And a recognition, therefore, that the power for those decisions mostly reside in the state.”

That decision-making did not reside in Māori communities was an example of structural and systemic racism, he clarified.

One of the survivors watching in the audience was Ihorangi Reweti-Peters (Ngāti Tūwharetoa, Ngāti Kahungunu).

He was left feeling underwhelmed by the evidence from Te Kani and wanted to see more in-depth answers, particularly when it came to discussions about racism.

“Talking about structural racism, just like the one or two word replies. There could be a bit more detail in that explaining if there is, or if Oranga Tamariki don’t think there is structural racism.”

Reweti-Peters said he hoped Oranga Tamariki would continue to tell the truth for the two remaining days witnesses were on the stand.

He also wanted to see an apology from Te Kani to survivors of abuse in care and protection.