The Nation: Lisa Owen interviews Tracey Martin
On The Nation: Lisa Owen interviews Tracey Martin
Headlines:
Minister
for Children Tracey Martin says there’s a need for a
permanent independent authority like the IPCA to monitor the
treatment of children in state care and handle
complaints.
Martin says
she can’t commit to an apology from the government, but
says the prime minister should probably be the one to
apologise. “I think if we’re going to take
responsibility for what is actually going to come out in
this inquiry, and we have a very clear idea of the sort of
the incidents that are going to be exposed, then it’s very
serious, and I think it needs to be dealt with at the
highest level.”
Lisa Owen: Now, the new government’s committed to an inquiry into the abuse of children in state care. The move’s been welcomed, but there are few details that have been released so far. So how will it all work? We’re joined now by the new Minister for Children, New Zealand First’s Tracey Martin. Good morning, Minister.
Tracey Martin:
Morena.
So, the inquiry — what are you
thinking? Will it have the power to compel
witnesses?
And all of these
details, unfortunately, are still to be worked through. So
I’ve had two meetings with officials to clarify what are
our options, what sort of inquiry will it be, will it have
those sort of powers, who will we consult before we even
scope out the cabinet paper, for example, to take it to
cabinet. So at this stage, I can’t answer that question
100%.
It’s on your 100 day
plan.
It’s on the Labour
Party’s 100 day plan that this government will deliver,
yes.
Yeah, and so you’re part of
that.
Yes, we
are.
So in terms of that, you’re running out
of time to come up with these answers, so what are you
thinking, though? If not having a solid idea, do you think
it would be the best-case scenario to be able to compel
witnesses?
It’s not
something that I’ve traversed at the moment with the
officials. The major priority that we had was actually
around making sure that within the 100 days, so the 4th of
February is the close-off date — 3rd, 4th of February is
the close-off date that we’re talking about — that we
will have in place a basis for an inquiry that will provide
an opportunity for those who have been victims to come
forward with comfort to be able to express their truth, to
be able to be validated in that truth and to feel that they
have received the justice and the validation that they need.
So those are the things that have been the driving part of
the conversations at this stage.
Okay, because
the brief is to get it set up in the 100
days.
Yes, that’s
right.
So will the inquiry have the scope to
attribute blame?
Well,
it’s one of those things. If you look at the Never Again
campaign, that was never a driver. It wasn’t about
finding somebody or something to hang some guilt on. It was
about making sure that the truth was told, that we bravely
face actions that took place in this country that harmed
individuals and that those individuals received an
apology.
But the victims want truth and
accountability, so will there be accountability through this
inquiry?
I guess what I’m
driving at is basically saying that if you put out the
truth, there are going to have to be recognition by the
state that this is what happened to these people and they
were under the care of the state at that time. If you’re
asking me are there going to be people that are then going
to be charged or held accountable through the justice
system, I can’t make that statement, because I’m not in
charge of the justice system.
What period will
the inquiry
investigate?
Well, at this
stage, that’s part of the scoping that’s being done, and
I don’t want to actually pre-empt that. There are at least
20 organisations that the officials are now talking to
before we take a proposed scope to cabinet.
So
you mentioned an apology. There will definitely be a formal
apology from the
government?
Again, I
can’t make that commitment on behalf of the government. I
can tell you where I’m coming from.
Yeah,
tell me where you’re coming
from.
So, where I’m
coming from is if we stand in our truth and we bravely say,
‘This is the reality that happened to these New Zealanders
under the care of the state,’ then the state has a
responsibility to acknowledge that, to own it and therefore
there should be an apology. But I don’t speak on behalf of
the whole government. That has to go to
cabinet.
Who do you think would be the
appropriate person to make that apology,
then?
I don’t know. I had
this question asked of me on Te Karere as well. I don’t
know. Because I’ve been in the job two weeks, let’s be
clear. I don’t know whether it would be appropriate for a
minister at my level, whether it should come from the Prime
Minister, whether it should even be bigger than
that.
What’s your gut feeling? Should it be
the Prime Minister?
I think
if we’re going to take responsibility for what is actually
going to come out in this inquiry, and we have a very clear
idea of the sort of the incidents that are going to be
exposed, then it’s a very, very serious— it’s very
serious acts that have taken place here, and I think it
needs to be dealt with at the highest
level.
So Prime Minister, then, in your view.
So do you think that you will set up some kind of
independent authority, a permanent independent authority,
like the IPCA, to monitor treatment of kids in care and the
actions of the ministry? Is that something you would like to
see?
Yes, I think there is
a need for that. I think it’s that transparency that
we’re hoping to actually— Part of what Oranga Tamariki,
the reason why it was set up by the previous government and
part of the direction of travel it’s in now is to make
sure that we are more transparent, that we are working more
closely with our communities, that the voice of children is
heard more often. And so an independent body whereby
complaints can be taken, I think, would be a really good and
transparent thing. It would help both the ministry and our
children.
How much will is there to do
that?
I think there’s
quite strong will to do that.
So you’re
quite confident you can get that over the
line?
I think— Well,
I’m fairly confident about my argumentative skills, so I
believe that it would be in the best interest of
children.
So Labour supports it, basically, is
what I’m asking.
At this
stage, again, I haven’t taken it to cabinet, but I believe
the will is there to actually say there needs to be this
level of transparency.
Okay. Let’s move on
to Oranga Tamariki, or the Ministry for Children, as we’re
now calling it. Rebstock report has recommended that the
threshold for intervening in kids’ lives be lowered. So
that would mean instead of working with around 20,000 kids,
that they will be working with around 76,000 children. So
how many more social workers do you reckon you’re going to
need?
I don’t really
know, but I know that we definitely need more resourcing. I
know that the workload on the front line when it was CYFS
has been too high. I think what’s probably more important
is how do the social workers, once we make sure that we have
the appropriate resourcing— And remember that Oranga
Tamariki’s been there for six months, so there’s still a
lot of work and a lot of mapping going on. But it’s how we
work with those young people has been the major
driver.
We spoke to Grainne Moss earlier in
the year, and she said that social workers spend about only
25% of their work time face to face with children. What
would your goal be in terms of that face-to-face contact, do
you think? Because 25 seems
low.
And I guess, I
suppose, it depends— Okay, let me have a think about this.
From the perspective of— If 25% of the time is dealt with
face to face with the actual child, what is the 75%? And
that would be something I need to find out. Again, job —
two weeks. But what we know is that children want to see
their social workers more. So we have to lift that 25%.
However, we also need to be working more closely with
community. Social workers just can’t do this on their own.
Oranga Tamariki can’t do this on their own. We’ve got to
widen the community that we’re working with. We’ve got
to have more families come in and more New Zealanders put
themselves forward to partner with us to actually assist
these young people.
Okay, we’re almost out
of time. There’s a couple of things I want to get through.
The pay for a social worker is between 46 and 77 grand. Do
you anticipate bumping that up to keep good
people?
There is, I
believe, already a pay claim going forward, and so there’s
negotiations that have to happen next
year.
But would you support
raising?
I can’t make
that statement, because that would influence the
negotiations towards the middle of next year, and that would
be irresponsible of me. So I know that it’s happening, and
I know there’s negotiations that are going to take
place.
Okay, caregivers is another issue.
About 50% of caregivers who take in kids are living on
benefits. Is that the optimal
situation?
It depends what
you mean by the benefit. From the perspective of I actually
work quite closely with Grandparents Raising Grandchildren,
so I’m not—
Yeah, super’s a benefit.
Universal benefit.
Okay, we
don’t call it a benefit. We call it, you know… But
that’s all right. So if we’re talking about that, we
know that there are those financial pressures there.
That’s why I fought to have, and got through unanimously,
the Clothing Allowance Bill so that kin carers will get that
clothing allowance, so we know that we need to support them
financially better. Absolutely we know that to be true.
It’s about how do we work through that and make sure that
it’s practical support and financial support that goes
directly to that child.
So are you going to
raise the amount of money that carers are paid or the
allowances they get? Is that one of your
goals?
The allowances,
certainly, it is my goal to make sure that we don’t have
situations where grandparents raising grandchildren, for
example, who get a new baby arrive on their door in the
middle of the night because it needs to be brought to a
place that is safe, and they have no nappies, no cot, no
anything for that child. So it’s not necessarily all about
raising the allowances. How do we support that child and
those people that are actually stepping
forward?
Okay, money’s tight, though. Have
you guys got the money for
that?
Look, we’ve got a
budget coming up, and I’m sure that we can manage what
we’re managing.
Minister, thanks for joining
me this morning.
Transcript provided by Able. www.able.co.nz