Campbell on the inquiry into the abuse of children in care
Gordon Campbell on the inquiry into the abuse of children in care
Apparently, PM Jacinda Ardern has chosen to exclude faith-based institutions from the government’s promised inquiry into the abuse of children in state care. Any role for religious institutions – eg the Catholic Church – would be only to observe and to learn from any revelations that arise from the inquiry’s self-limiting focus on state-run institutions:
[Ardern] said the primary role of the inquiry was
to look at the state's responsibility….She said any
religious institution with concerns needed to look at the
issue, ask what they have done about the issues and their
own history.
Such a narrowing of focus
would be unfortunate, for a whole variety of reasons, and
not merely because a more wide-ranging commission of inquiry
in Australia found a high prevalence of children in care
being sexually assaulted within religious institutions.
Sexual assault is only one dimension of the abuse of children in care. Certainly, the state’s responsibility with respect to children in care differs somewhat when the children concerned are within (a) religious institutions and (b) state-run ones. Yet it is not as if the state’s responsibility ends entirely at the church gates. As Ardern herself pointed out to RNZ, “the state's reach in this country often went beyond state institutions, and the inquiry would look at the full process.” However, Ardern added, “the primary role of the inquiry was to look at the state's responsibility.”
Well no – at least it shouldn’t be. Primarily, this isn’t a technical exercise undertaken to “look at the state’s responsibility.” The “primary role of the inquiry” should be to provide justice and relief to the victims, and the fencing off of an abuse inquiry on the basis of where it occurred, historically (state-run yes, faith based, no) seems arbitrary, and done for reasons of political convenience. That’s disappointing in a PM who has made so much of her desire to put the wellbeing of children first.
Yes, as Australia has shown, it will take longer and be more expensive to conduct a more inclusive inquiry. Their inquiry took five years, ran to 21 volumes, and made 400 recommendations, including calls for an end to priestly celibacy, and to the secrecy of the confessional.
The [Australian] commission urged the Australian
Catholic bishops conference to ask the Vatican to reform
canon law by removing provisions that “prevent, hinder or
discourage compliance with mandatory reporting laws by
bishops or religious superiors. We recommend that canon law
be amended so that the ‘pontifical secret’ does not
apply to any aspect of allegations or canonical disciplinary
processes relating to child sexual abuse,” the report
said.
It also said the conference
should urge the Vatican to rethink its celibacy rules. The
commission found that while celibacy for clergy was not a
direct cause of abuse, it elevated the risk when
compulsorily celibate male clergy or religious figures had
privileged access to children.
In
December, the Catholic archbishop of Melbourne Denis Hart
responded that the seal of confessional secrecy cannot be
broken, but that he would encourage any penitent child
abuser to self-report their actions outside the confessional
so that the police could be alerted. [Hart did not address
the issue of whether the Church was colluding by offering
spiritual absolution to abusers, while leaving children
vulnerable to relapses by the perpetrators, by not reporting
their actions to the authorities.]
One can see why – for its own convenience - the Ardern government might want to limit the scope of the inquiry that it has in mind. Yet it can hardly claim the moral high ground when doing so.
Fencing off the issue
History cannot, and should
not, be fenced off in the way our government seems to have
in mind. After all, some voices within the Catholic Church
in New Zealand– in the era of Pope Francis at least, and
with the fallout from two decades of priestly child abuse
scandals in mind – apparently want to have the
Church’s own institutions included within the scope of the
inquiry:
Bill Kilgallon, who is in charge of handling
the complaints for the Catholic Church in New Zealand, said
he was disappointed the inquiry would not cover religious
institutions. He said there were a lot of benefits to having
a wide-ranging investigation covering many groups. "You find
some issues in common, some issues that are different, and
you get a much better picture of what we need to do to
prevent abuse happening in the future." Mr Kilgallon said
expanding the scope of the inquiry would also encourage more
people who were abused to come
forward.
Exactly. If the wellbeing of the
victims is to be the main focus, the scope needs to be
expanded. Ultimately the separation is an illusion, anyway.
How state care and religious-based care differed – but
also interacted - has to be an integral part of explaining
how these systems of child abuse evolved, and were hidden,
for so long.
Reporting the
father
Shock horror. Headline : the cost of no
longer trying to force beneficiary mothers to name the
father of their child may run to $25 million a year.
That sanction has been a priority for scrapping by the new government.
Under the previous government, beneficiaries who did not name the father of their child – usually because of threats of violence for this making the father liable for child support – were punished by having their benefits docked by $22 per child. Previously, there was a degree of bipartisan support for the measure. While the sanction had been introduced by a National government in 1990, it was increased by the Clark government in 2005. Theoretically, a threat of violence would exempt the mother from that penalty, but the onus of proof was entirely on the mother to document such a threat, and to disclose all the details of her sexual history both to a lawyer, and at the WINZ office.
The removal of a penalty provision that was punishing mother and child by reducing what was already a subsistence income – and in a situation where the ‘ safeguards’ were of dubious value - will undoubtedly prove to be more costly. Yet if society’s prime focus is on the wellbeing of the mother and child, the penalty has had to be scrapped. Failure to provide child support has to be addressed by means other than punishing the dependent family.
Yes, the new move may now create a related form of pressure back on the mother – since, with the penalty for non-disclosure of paternity removed, more men will undoubtedly put pressure upon mothers not to name them. Ultimately, that's the price we pay for a welfare safety net that puts the wellbeing of vulnerable mothers and children at the forefront of our concern.
After all…if we want to provide justice for those children in decades past who were harmed in care – and are willing to spend millions of dollars on a proper inquiry to put that right - surely we should be willing to pay a few more millions to prevent further harm being done to the vulnerable children in our communities, right now.
Footnote : Ironically, the estimated likely cost ( $25 million a year, or $100 million over four years) of scrapping the non-disclosure of paternity sanction is exactly what the last government set aside in the last Budget to beef up its controversial ‘social investment’ approach to health and welfare spending. Moreover, National also spent almost as much ($17.8 million) on the one-off cost of rebranding Child Youth and Family Services as the short-lived Ministry for Vulnerable Children, a waste that did manage to generate a few ‘shock horror’ headlines at the time. Point being: circa $25 million extra a year on scrapping the paternity non-disclosure penalty is not going to break the bank.
Sylvan Esso
The
immensely likeable duo that make up Sylvan Esso (Amelia
Meath, Nick Sanborn) are playing at Laneways this year, and
you should make the effort. This week, they’ve just
released a fine new single called “Parade”. Sanborn
is/was previously in the eccentric folk-influenced rock
group Megafaun, while Meath was the driving force in the
all-female folk trio Mountain Man. I'd also strongly
recommend Sylvan Esso’s recent live Echo Mountain Sessions
on Youtube, which add new dimensions to favourite tracks
from the duo’s last album such as “ The
Glow”….
Here’s both the new single and the Echo Mountain version of “Die Young” which jazzily turns the song inside out, with Meath getting vocal support from her Mountain Man pals…