It found many of the 100s of children and young people sent to Lake Alice were tortured with electric shocks (ECT) and painful paraldehyde injections.
The Government unveiled a redress scheme - with two pathways – for Lake Alice torture survivors but one survivor is now legally challenging the scheme.
A survivor of torture at the notorious Lake Alice psychiatric facility is taking the Government to court over its redress scheme.
Flaxmere man Malcolm Richards – who was tortured with ECT [electroconvulsive therapy] as a 15-year-old at the Manawatū facility –is seeking a judicial review of the scheme.
Richards and his lawyer Christopher Griggs told reporters outside the Wellington High Court the scheme launched last year was wrong.
It did not go far enough to compensate for the life-long trauma survivors like Richards still experienced decades later, they said.
Richards urged the Government to “fix” the scheme by removing the payment cap and removing the “ex-gratia” element so people can easily challenge the individualised assessment in court.
“You’re the boss, it stops with you ... you need to fix it.”
He told reporters of severe memory problems and cognitive issues experienced in the decades after the abuse.
“I struggle with PTSD, I lose track of what I am saying, I can’t find the right words for what I want to say. It is really hard to explain.
“There were lots of children that received ECT [electroconvulsive therapy] in Lake Alice and I was one of them.
“Though it felt much longer to me, the medical notes records that I was sent to Lake Alice for two months.”
Richards told the inquiry there were “two types of ECT – one was planned and the other was used as a punishment".
“I had both.”
The Government’s redress scheme for survivors of torture at Lake Alice includes either an expedited payment of $150,000 or request an arbiter to complete an individualised assessment.
The Government has set aside $22.68 million for payment – including operating costs.
Richards rejected the $150,000 payment out of principle, saying he wanted to see through his legal challenge in the hope of changing the current redress system.
“It is extremely hard on my family. It’s very draining, very tiring and I can understand why (people who took the expedited payment) don’t want to fight anymore.”
Malcolm Richards, supported by his wife Sharon, is seeking a judicial review of the Lake Alice redress scheme, which was launched late last year. Photo / Marty Melville
Minister responds
Minister Erica Stanford, who is responsible for the scheme, said when she advised Richards last year of the Government’s redress scheme, he indicated he may consider litigation.
“I acknowledge that there is no amount of money that can ever make up for the torture that the survivors of Lake Alice experienced as children.”
Stanford said she had spoken with some survivors who appreciated the Government’s public apology and the choice of two pathways for financial redress.
She said $7m had been paid in expedited payments (of $150,000 each) to 47 survivors. There were another 29 fast track payments in progress.
Forty-four survivors had chosen the individualised pathway, she said.
Stanford has previously said the redress served “as an expression of our regret as to the many ways in which they were failed.”
In February she said the Government wanted to ensure people had choice in the redress process.
“A number of survivors of the Lake Alice Unit have made clear to me the importance of choice. For some certainty and pace are a priority, for others an individualised process is more important.”
Stanford said the current approach provided flexibility for survivors and was more responsive to the different experiences of torture.
Minister Erica Stanford is responsible for the Government's response to the Royal Commission of Inquiry into abuse in state care. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Christopher Griggs, Richards’ lawyer, said there had been “years of denials” under subsequent Governments about abuse and torture at Lake Alice and other state and faith-based institutions.
Christopher Griggs - the lawyer for Malcolm Richards - says: “We need a tribunal that will look at each individual case".
Photo / Marty Melville.
“For people like Malcolm who have suffered life-long torture, it is just not fair or adequate.
“We need a tribunal that will look at each individual case, work out what is fair and adequate and that is what the Government should be paying, not some sort of pre-determined figure.”
He urged the Government not to fight in court but “listen to what Malcolm is saying” and “fix this once and for all”.
Griggs said he believed many survivors would have opted for the fast-track payment for personal reasons – rather than because they supported the payment option.
“I can’t reveal client information – but I can tell you that a number of those people are right behind what Malcolm is doing today, and they have taken the money for personal reasons.
“These people, most of them are in their 60s, many of them have life-long health issues because of what they suffered at Lake Alice so some of them just need to take the money now.
“It doesn’t mean they think it is right.”
Malcolm Richards outside the Wellington High Court after filing for a judicial review of the Government's redress scheme. Photo / Marty Melville
Abuse in care report
In July last year, the long-awaited landmark report from the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care – six years in the making – was released.
It branded the abuse and neglect of hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders in the care of state and faith-based institutions as “a national disgrace”.
Minister Erica Stanford leaving a press conference where she revealed a redress package for those who were tortured at the Lake Alice facility. Photo / Mark Mitchell
The Royal Commission of Inquiry found most of the young people at the facility were there for behavioural reasons, including abuse, harm or trauma, rather than mental distress.
Among its findings, it detailed how in the 1970s and 80s, hundreds of children and young people were sent to the psychiatric institution where many were tortured with electric shocks and painful paraldehyde injections.
Stanford said these weren’t administered for any medical reason – but for “punishment and emotional control through terror”.
“It is beyond heartbreaking.”
In July last year, the Government for the first time formally acknowledged this amounted to torture.
