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

Thursday, 18 August 2022

Commissioners for the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care listen as witnesses take the stand.

The Education Ministry’s murky answers to questions about systemic racism and Treaty of Waitangi obligations left the Royal Commission puzzled on Thursday.

Speaking from the witness stand on the fourth day of the Royal Commission’s Abuse in Care inquiry – Institutional Response Hearing the ministry’s chief executive and secretary for education Iona Holsted said her ministry acknowledged the Crown agency failed to protect children in their care.

Between 1950 and 1999, which is the scope of the inquiry, Holsted said the education system failed to protect children, in particular Māori, Pasifika, deaf and disabled children, from abuse and failed to reduce barriers for inclusion.

“I acknowledge that the Department of Education failed to actively protect te reo and encourage its use by iwi and Māori and that was in breach of Te Tiriti.

* Marginalised groups suffer poor health and discrimination, mental health report finds

Ministry of Education chief executive and secretary for education Iona Holsted takes the stand at the Abuse in Care hearing.

* Meng Foon: Why we need affirmative action for minority groups

“This has had an ongoing detrimental effect on the acquisition and use of the Māori language and on the tikanga and mātauranga of Māori.

Frances Tagaloa was one of many Pasifika survivors to speak at the Royal Commission.

“Historically the state has failed to provide education fit for different groups, including blind, Deaf, disabled tamariki.

'We cannot change what has happened, but we are committed to lifting participation and progress.”

As Holsted noted the changes that have been made in the past 40 years, she described the education system as “diverse and fragmented” and lacking the power to oversee schools, especially private schools, in a way that the public may believe it can.

“It’s an understatement to say that the education system in New Zealand is complex.

“Within the context of the regulatory framework and through a devolved set of functions [the ministry] has some oversight, but little direct influence on what happens on a day-to-day basis in schools.”

However, it was Holsted’s reluctance to accept the Ministry of Education had Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations or that there had been systemic racism within the education system that contributed to the harm felt by non-Pākehā children that led to some pointed questions from the Commission.

Abuse in Care commissioner Dr Andrew Erueti is puzzled by the limitations of responsibility the Ministry of Education will accept.

Holsted told the Commission the ministry provided advice to assist the Crown’s Te Tiriti obligations rather than due to its own obligations as a Crown agency, and that the harm caused by the ministry was due to discrimination, rather than racism.

“We have as a system too often, not always, but too often, had lower expectations of certain communities.

“Our expectations of those children is biased against their success, and we know that expectation is an extremely powerful influence.”

When questioned by Commissioner Dr Andrew Erueti on why the ministry was distancing itself from the Crown and Te Tiriti obligations, she replied, “We, as a policy agency, are navigating between those two things to provide advice to allow the Crown to exercise its right and obligations. Does that help?”

“Not really,” Erueti said, “because you are the Crown.”

“What you are saying is that even though you are the Crown, you’re not a Treaty partner, the ministry is not a Treaty partner.”

Holsted’s response, that the ministry was “a creature of the Crown”, did not seem to help clear up the confusion, but Erueti moved on to ask why she was unwilling to acknowledge the systemic racism that survivors had described across the course of earlier hearings.

“You’re prepared to concede that there is discriminatory legislation historically, but when it comes to the notion of systemic racism within the education sector historically, you say you can't make that assessment.”

Erueti brought up the Native Schools Act as an example of the systemic alienation of Māori from their culture and identity.

Send your tips, story ideas and comments to poutiaki@stuff.co.nz

“They weren't allowed to speak te reo Māori and it was used as a tool for assimilation. Māori were effectively excluded from the education system.

“You’re not prepared to accept that there was any systemic racism within the education system?”

Holsted: “I’m not saying I don’t accept it. I’m just saying I’m not sure what it means … because I’m not sure how it takes us anywhere.”

From the bench, Erueti took a breath.

“What is important for counsel is just to get the acknowledgement and recognition of systemic racism within the education system … it's so important in terms of healing and also recognising the extent of the problem so we can fix it today,” he said.

The hearing continues.