Anyone who thinks Key leaving the country for the whanau ora announcement is a co-incidence can’t spell Crosby Textor.
Having pay the Bill English sit by Tariana to announce it must be part of the deal for not paying back the cash he got from pretending Dipton is his primary place of residence.
While I’m sure we can do better in involving community organisations in service delivery, it is no secret that I am more cynical than many about Tariana’s understanding of the role of a Minister, the limits and the ethics involved. There were some public and some not public examples of her going well over the line of what is acceptable when she was a Labour Minister. Poor Steve Maharey had to watch her very carefully and I got called in to prevent a couple of messes she was trying to set up. More like whanau tahi – her whanau tahi – in those days.
The Standard has an analysis of the report – I haven’t read it.
Not sure if JT helped the cause much with his admission in the Herald this morning he had spent $20m supposedly held in trust in anticipation of getting a cut of Aunty Tari’s $1 b. And he is complaining because officials are following proper processes.
And the timing wasn’t flash in Wellington with a battle royale going on around allegations of missing health funding from a runanga contracting to the DHB.
But the big lesson about not mixing contracting and political favours in NZ’s recent history is the way Bill Birch and Tau Henare set up the contract for Donna Awatere’s Pipi Foundation. She ended up in jail. They made decisions politicians shouldn’t have.
So will Tariana. And while there will some waving there won’t be much smiling.
A Turia Bird singing:
O Whanau my Whanau! our fearful trip is done;
The waka has weather’d every rack, the prize we sought is won;
The port is near, the bells I hear, the people all exulting,
While follow eyes the steady Key, the vessel glib and blaring:
But O heart! heart! heart!
O the bleeding drops of red,
Where on the deck my Whanau lies,
Fallen cold and dead.
@Rob M – Great poem
Trevor, I take it that this ludicrous project will be stopped once you are re elected ?
I like the principle of whanau ora, and am prepared to give it more than a year or two to determine success. Our current models are making bugger all inroads into addressing failing maori health, education and “crime”, so let’s try a new way. I also like the fact that it is criteria based, and although more maori will fit those criteria, non Maori who fit are included.
Whanau Ora will be privatisation in plain view (albeit incrementally and somewhat mysteriously). Crony politics is never a pleasant sight, it degrades those on both sides of the equation.
Your post is very thought provoking and it makes me wonder how things would have been had Labour won the last election and how the coalition would have worked if the Maori Party were your partners. May be they will always we the last cab off the rank…
Tracy – Perhaps the inroads will be problematic while the relative wealth and well being of the “lower end” of the money ladder keeps falling. This is mot a Maori issue but one for all who are in the lower reaches of the economic swamp.
A major political shift will have to happen to address the problems of health and crime related to the forgotten and maligned part of our community.
With all the high ideals and aims we hear in the spin from various spokes people in govt, no mention of reversing the trend of the diminishing wealth for the bottom 50% or the nation.
Their slice of that cake is just 3% having fallen from 5%. The top 50% control over 95% of NZs wealth while the elite 10% have 51.8 % of the wealth and rising.
You can perhaps see from this what is really happening and governments are assisting this process of creating a desperate and disillusioned underclass.
The Whanau Ora discussion will do nothing to address the big issue. I suggest it is a political sideshow and will have the potential of perhaps making a naive Maori Party blunder into another reorganisation with many drawbacks.
How can things improve when siphoning of the communities resources and wealth is channeled to the elite few who don’t need it. Arguing over crumbs under the table of those eating the cake.
Notice that national firmly demand no new money will be used for Whanau Ora. With redirection of funds for political expediency some existing services will miss out. Will any of those services be what you may need.
Trevor as you know doubt know by now I a a big fan of not re-inventing the wheel, making use of what we have and doing things like a one-stop shop where by a more co-ordinatated approach is taken towards Maori and issues that pertain predominately to Maori.
So I’m with Tracey: I am prepared to give it a year or two and hope like mad it works.
However, I definitely share your cynicism where the Maori Party and Tariana Turia is concerned!!!
But it is going ahead so the only thing to do, like National Standards, is cross our fingers & toes and hope it works.
@Rebecca. and hope not too many people are effected by the cuts in other areas to fund it. (e.g. school advisors in Science, PE, G&T cuts before National Standards announcement).
Linda yes we can only hope although many would no doubt argue that there is not much further for them to fall as have been struggling for many years, particularly over the last 5.
E.g. high schools in Upper Hutt have only just come out of a 5 year freeze on funding due to arguments over whether to build a super school which has meant they have been left to deteriorate and now face massive costs in upgrades and the Capital & Coast DHB borrowed the money to pay for the new hospital that Labour is so proud of building – one wonders how this is possible given the unprecedented economic boom of the 2000s
Question to the Minister for Social Development and Employment : Feb 17 2010
Hon Annette King: Does she agree that Wh?nau Ora is a cross-sectoral, whole-of-Government concept that uses a structured process of Government agencies and community organisations working together to achieve better education, housing, health, and social outcomes for families, in which both Government and non-governmental and community organisations will participate; if not, why not?
Hon PAULA BENNETT: Yes.
Hon Annette King: Is she aware that the description I have just given is that of the Strengthening Families programme, which has existed for 6 years, has been evaluated, and is operating effectively? Why are we going through the pretence of saying to New Zealanders that the Government has a new programme for vulnerable families, and wasting time and money pulling the wool over their eyes?
Darien perhaps it is about perception more than anything: Wh?nau Ora is a Maori title therefore perhaps it will be perceived by Maori as being something that recognises and validates their culture more than Strengthening Families?
While I personally agree with Strengthening Families and love what it has achieved, it has fallen well short in terms of Maori and Pacific Islanders having the security of food in the tummies, clothes on their back & a roof over their heads. It has also done nothing to stem the increase of over 100% in substantiated child abuse cases during the 9 year tenure under the Labour Government. Abuse (or at least physical, neglect & maltreatment) that has been committed by and large by Maori.
Darien, what was her answer tot he last question?
JohnW one thing at a time, in my opinion. We, the masses complain all the time about high Maori crime rates and poor education rates and when someone wants to address it we suddenly want it to include other groups? I listened to J Tamihere this morning, a man whose views I dont often share but I agreed with most of what he said.
Maori are in the position they are, whether we like it or not because a british middle class white culture was imposed on them. Pakeha NZ and Pakeha ideas have failed so why not try another way? I just don’t get the resistance.
I also like the traditional (pre european) Maori way of dealing with crime, victims, and perpetrators and I can see the merit in that. However we get so enshrined in our ways we find excuses to not try stuff.
I also share Trevors ocncerns inhis opening post. Already Key has said it is for everyone, while Tariana has said for maori. Of course depending on the criteria they might both be right, that is, it is for everyone who meets the laid out criteria, and that will mostly be Maori. BUT that is not the same as seperatism or whatever some folks are calling it.
Exactly Darien, and same for Nat Stds. Tolley saying ‘for majority of schools no change’ (that’s 26 million for no change in majority of schools!)
Tracey: “Maori are in the position they are, whether we like it or not because a british middle class white culture was imposed on them. Pakeha NZ and Pakeha ideas have failed so why not try another way? I just don’t get the resistance.” I like how you think! I could not agree more.
Yes the past is the past, but healing is current – surely that is obvious. We need to address the problems that many Maori face in a way that supports and validates their culture not impose more pakeha rhetoric that has little meaning culturally or otherwise.
@Darien 10.26 Ha!
– I get sick of the garbage spin that Labour did nothing! 
Spud don’t get too excited, Strengthening Families was a National government initiative in 1996 – was piloted then and rolled out by 1999. Their website confirms this :p
Further it does nothing to network with the NGOs – the groups that work MOST with Maori and is merely part of Family and Community Services which has about 40 staff total.
So no, Labour did not actually do that much at all in terms of the reduction of all key issues pertaining to Maori and yes, Wh?nau Ora is a new approach.
Rebecca – Next time I’m in wellington we will have to have coffee, and hope we dont kill each other
Oooh, catfight!
@Rebecca – but Labour must have kept it going!
Therefore Labour did make an effort. They tried to close the gaps!!!!
Haha yes I’m sure we could last few a couple of sentences or so!
P.s Spud you are one very loyal potatoe, good for you!
Spud good point @ close the gaps. I kind of chuckle when I think of the Orewa speech type of response to close the gaps and now NACT has Whanau Ora.
I also agree with the person ( up there ) or on another thread who reminds people of Hollow Men. There’s a reason national shot the messenger (Hagar) because they couldn’t refute much else of what he exposed. Everyone conveniently forgot Hagar’s rolein Corngate when labelling him a Labour patsy.
I have had a quick read.
Firstly, I am all for a more holistic and far reaching policy that sees interagency work and a more community centered approach.
I have some questions.
1. Does Tariana get a pay increase as its new minister? (honest question here)
2. What will they do about the agencies that won’t want to play ball or will be working to undermine it (or those who are just plain ignorant of the needs of maori – esp in orgs like CYPS – or how will the schools who are predom white middle class reconcile their white middle class thinking with a whanau based on?)
I liked (in theory)
- the scope – the aspirations are great and eventually, to see the same kind of thinking applied to our most vulnerable and at risk families across the cultural spectrum would be magic.
- I think there is real merit for this policy to make a difference – I disagree with the questions the standards raised – it was clear what the issues were – and how they considered it should be made accountable (all points I agreed with)
I think the devil will be in the actual work involved in making it happen – the model seems quite good, but I sense actually getting it running will be costly and I am not sure where the money is being appropriated from.
The other issue I have is the lack of resources – I will use mental health and education as an example.
There are LIMITED to NO appropriate maori based special education ed psychs/front line GSE workers – this is a group that have been cut down thanks to cuts in education. IN some parts of nz there are NO ed psychs – let alone ones who have the exp to work with whanau (with credibility and understanding of reo and tikanga). Mental health has a massive shortfall – esp for kids. The waiting lists are huge – this has the potential to make the system even harder for kids who are most at risk to get access to if sole maori provision takes precedence over those who are most at risk (regardless of culture).
I think, as said before, its a good idea – not rocket science, and something we need to support and look to rolling out for all vulnerable – BUT – I do worry that there are some snags in the actual delivery, most around access across the country (esp hard to access places) and the limited resources – not to mention exactly how it will be funded, and which buckets will have to be removed or shared. THis detail needs to be there.
Finally – this one line worried me – its so ACT and heather roy that it scares me a little that there are other agendas driving this….your thoughts on this statement trev?
(In terms of the provison model)
“The third option was for a practitioner who had expertise in counselling whanau and a wide knowledge of local
services. The practitioner would act as a broker, ensuring that whanau had access to the most appropriate service and experienced the best possible outcomes. If, for example, whanau were seeking a particular type of
education for their children, the broker would negotiate entry into the school that could deliver the desired result.”
DOES THE WORD BROKER SOUND FAMILIAR??????
I went to a Strengthening Families meeting a few months ago, and was very impressed. There were about 20 people there including friends, people from school, all sorts of government agencies such as WINZ, NGOs, medical people, even a secretary from the local MP’s office. Wasn’t limited in who could be there – was a group of people who could all possibly be supportive in one way or another and particularly effective when they shared expertise around and with the family concerned. The real work is in getting the people in one room together, good facilitation and an ongoing family-centred plan.
My worry is that Whanau Ora will drain off some of the funding for the groups involved in this sort of situation and they won’t have the people to go to Strengthening Families or resources for the non-Whanau Ora-covered families.
Paul you raise excellent points. While there are plenty of shortfalls in terms of existing funding and programs in the main sector, there are loads of volunteers and NGOs that go a long way to fill the gaps, but who have been struggling for years to keep up with the demand through share increase in need and lack of appropriate funding.
My only hope is that Wh?nau Ora finally achieves what everything else has failed to do: support and make use of those groups and people like Jim Moriarty who are already doing fantastic work (see http://www.throng.co.nz/real-crime/real-crime-truth-about-us)
However, given that National cut things like Te Hurihanga in Hamilton then it does seem to be a case as usual of what the Government (as in ALL – past & present) giveth with one hand they double and take with the other….
I have also been involved in a large number of strengthening families conferences, and they mostly work really well at addressing the whole families interests – esp for the kids.
Hilary you have just described what the bureacrcy describes as ‘action’. a big meeting.
So far with W-O, there isnt even a real discription of what they are doing.
Its something Tamihere will run with, and with his sidekick Donna Awatere-Huata, will come up the process AFTER they have been allocated all the money ( and spent it)
It does seem, on my reading, that some existing groups will have funding withdrawn from what they are currently doing, or plan to do, and groups who align with whanau ora principles will get more funding, or new funding? This is hw the “no cuts” claim is being made, I think.
This is clearly a feather in MP cap and part of the many trade offs they have done. Thats how MMP works and I would like to trust the MP to know which battles to fight for maori betterment.
here are some quick notes relating to so-called traditional Maori justice “system”. I think you will see the similarities across the Whanau Ora proposal
Responsibility is collective not individual
Redress due to victim and victim’s family
“criminal” action due to an imbalance in offender’s social and family environment
Victim got balance redressed (land/goods/ work from offender) Utu means balance – could be punitive and unforgiving
“System” preserved by Treaty but dismantled by post Treaty laws
1893 law passed – single system
Dismantling Maori law was integral to destabilising Maori society
Ghost, they are being tied to outcome. I am not sure if this means it doesn’t matter how they reached the desired outcome, as long as they reach it. I can’t tell what the measurement of outcomes is going to be
@Rebecca- agreed – I (as everyone who reads this will know), believe in the interagency approach – but the concerns around resourcing and funding are very real. Those gaps exist now and I saw nothing in the report that indicates an increase in those essential frontline people – without them, the waiting lists and ability to intervene in a timely fashion just wont happen. Kids are falling through the cracks all through out this country – because the essential services and support structures are either over subscribed or do not exist.
Too often our most at risk kids are sent back into homes that can not cater for them and the balls ups that CYPS make in some of our offices is nothing short of criminal. But we do not have enough safe places for woman and children to go – we do not have the ability to place our at risk kids into a safe and nurturing ‘home’ where their mental health, physical health and educational needs can be met.
In theory, Whanau ora has the ability to address some of these shortcomings.
I have a close friend who is a teacher of new entrants. Today she said to me “someone needs to make a documentary showing who turns up to a new entrant class so the public can see what teachers start with. She said the idea that they are all well read, literate and ready to learn is ridiculous. She has four who speak not one word of English and many who can’t hold a pen or pencil.
Today, she is meeting a person she met at the gym who is an ESOL (?) teacher so she can get some free pointers on teaching kids learn english. As she said teachers in NZ in mainstream school classes are NOT taught how to teach english second language…
Paul “In theory, Whanau ora has the ability to address some of these shortcomings” – and this is where we all have to hold our breath and hope….hope that it produces real results and isn’t just another example of poor government initiative and poor government spending like the DHBs that were supposedly meant to be a superior model to the Area Health Boards & regional health care provider models.
I feel that no matter who is in government, they are always about stamping their mark than really getting to the nitty gritty of issues that have been haunting this country for decades.
Tracey: huge concern. I am also concerned that cuts to education may mean the end of very successful government initiatives like Parents As First Teachers who do wonders in terms of providing in-home support and education for new parents, especially those with no family support or are in the lower income bracket.
http://www.kiwifamilies.co.nz/Topics/Support+Groups/Parenting/Parents+as+First+Teachers.html
@Tracey – 4 non english speaking kids in one NE class suggests to me the school has a group of ESOL kids and therefore the school gets funding for them from the moe (not much but enough to make a difference) so therefore she should have an esol teacher on site (unless her school bot and principal are too tight to actually spend the money on a trained esol teacher and only use an inadequate teacher aide with limited to no training). Thats a bit of a concern – to have to tap into resources from the gym!! (and good on her) I am not sure what area you are in, (have forgotten sorry) but there should be access to support.
Here’s the rest of the exchange between Annette King and the ” step up and back them” Paula Bennett.
Hon PAULA BENNETT: We have to wonder why Labour has an issue with M?ori coming up with solutions to their own problems. I mean, Labour’s big idea was closing the gaps, which, according to the head of Te Puni K?kiri, was a heavily—
Mr SPEAKER: I heard the member ask a question, but I am not hearing much of an answer relating to the question, at all. If I recollect correctly, the question asked was: “Was the Minister aware that a description given was the description of”—from memory—“the Strengthening Families policy?”, or something. Some attempt to answer that question would be helpful, rather than a launch into the Opposition.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The second part of the question was: “Why is the Government doing it?”, which, of course, gives the Minister an opportunity to ask why, if the programme was so good for all those years, so many families are still living in poverty.
Mr SPEAKER: I am perhaps suitably censured. Maybe the question should have been briefer. I ask the Minister, though, in responding, not to launch straight into the Opposition.
Hon PAULA BENNETT: We have Strengthening Families; unfortunately we also have as much dysfunction and as many families struggling as there were under years of Labour’s just putting out more and more programmes, and driving stuff from Wellington into areas that did not work. We are talking about something that is grassroots; we are talking about something that is going back to those communities and to those families and working in quite a different way.
Hon Annette King: Does she still insist that it is the media’s fault that no one knows the definition of Wh?nau Ora even though her own ministry’s website has no clear definition, and even though she thinks it is one thing, Minister Turia and the M?ori Party think it is another, and the Prime Minister thinks it is a waterbed?
Hon PAULA BENNETT: No, I do not. I think that it is kind of clear, and that it is Labour that is having issues. We could go back to closing the gaps and “reducing inequalities”. I just don’t understand Labour’s issue with M?ori coming up with their own solutions to their own issues in their own communities, and coming up with stuff that really works. It is because it is not Wellington-driven.
Hon Annette King: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I listened carefully to the Minister’s answer and I did not hear any addressing of my question, at all.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: Mr Speaker—
Mr SPEAKER: I do not need assistance on this one. In fairness—given the nature of the member’s question on this occasion, which became somewhat flippant towards the end—I say that if one wants to inject that kind of thing into the question, the answer will never be quite as objective as the member might have wanted. I do not think I can intervene on this occasion.
Hon Annette King: Does she agree with the Prime Minister that most of the funding for Wh?nau Ora will come from existing baselines; if so, how much does she expect to be taken from Vote Social Development?
Hon PAULA BENNETT: As previously answered, the member must wait and see. Those announcements will be made in Budget 2010.
Shudder
, not much in the way of answers there! 
paul – the school would not be new to ESOL students but there is definitely no additional help being given to my friend.
@Tracey – that is a worry – I would be putting the responsbility for that onto the principal and their senior staff – they shoud be making sure their staff are supported with the prof dev and guidance they need. Its not rocket science, and esol kids have specific needs.