The Children’s Minister won’t take personal responsibility if there are inappropriate actions in her proposed military-style academies scheme (MSAs) for young offenders.
It follows concerns being expressed by Opposition parties, the Children’s Commissioner and the survivors of abuse in state care about the Government’s plans, including powers being granted to staff to use force against children in some limited circumstances.
Karen Chhour said she doesn’t control other people’s behaviour, but will do what she can to ensure safeguards against abuse exist.
“My expectations are that these young people are safe, they are cared for, and they’re actually treated in a loving environment where they wake up in the morning and they know they’re going to be okay,” she told the Herald.
“But I cannot take personal responsibility for someone else’s behaviour.”
The minister also believes some opponents of the so-called “bootcamps” are jumping to worst-case scenarios.
“Just understand, everything I can possibly do to better these kids’ lives, keep them safe and make sure this programme is successful, I am doing,” she said.
Legislation creating a Young Serious Offender (YSO) declaration and the ability to send some offenders aged between 15 and 17 to an MSA passed its first reading in Parliament on Thursday afternoon.
It’s part of the Government’s plan to attempt to address persistent offending by youngsters and was supported by the governing parties, but rejected by the Opposition.
A pilot of the MSA regime is under way. It involves a three-month period of offenders being in a youth justice residence, followed by nine months of transitioning back into the community with rehabilitative support, like one-on-one mentorship.
The bill would make these bootcamps permanent and provide new powers to those involved, like giving staff the ability to use force against children when they are outside the residences, like at overnight camps or marae. They currently exist inside the residences.
Providers could use force, no greater than reasonably necessary, to stop someone attempting to abscond or cause harm.
A leaked Cabinet committee document, revealed this month by the Herald, included the minister acknowledging those powers could be seen as “increasing the potential risk of abuse in custody”.
There have also been concerns about similarities with previous bootcamps – like the Great Barrier Island-based Te Whakapakari bootcamp that ran in the 1990s – where young people were abused. The Government last week apologised for abuse against people in state care.
In a sit-down interview with the Herald, Chhour said there were differences, pointing to the lack of vetting and training of staff in previous programmes, something highlighted by the Royal Commission of Inquiry into abuse in state care.
“They had no qualifications and had no right to even have the ability to be running those programmes and they also had weapons and that’s unacceptable in any person’s standards,” she said.
Chhour said the programme being run currently had greater oversight from the Children’s Commission and local mana whenua.
“I would never put young people into a position where I thought they wouldn’t have a voice if something was happening to them,” she said.
The Royal Commission of Inquiry report found complaints from young people at previous bootcamps hadn’t been adequately investigated. But Chhour believed oversight powers had improved since then and the Government was doing more to strengthen them.
The legislation gives the use-of-force powers to “qualifying providers” – which could include community organisations and iwi and hapū – that are brought in to to help run the MSA schemes.
The lack of detail of who those groups could include has been criticised and Chhour said it remains subject to further conversations.
“But there will be strict criteria and an expectation from myself that these organisations or any iwi or hapū providers are fully vetted, assessed to make sure they are a safe provider and they are approved through a very vigorous process making sure they have access available for people to come in and oversee what they are doing.”
She didn’t want anyone to think the Government would “repeat the mistakes of the past”, but also didn’t want to put a “barrier in place to devolving back to community” by not allowing third-party groups to be involved.
She said the use-of-force powers were intended not to just protect the young people but to protect staff and ensure any situations could be de-escalated before “it gets out of control”.
“It’s about keeping the young people safe, the community safe, and the staff safe.”
Among those questioning the use-of-force powers has been Green MP Tamatha Paul, who has said giving them to third parties was reminiscent of previous bootcamps. The Children’s Commissioner has said they need to be “given extremely careful and well-thought-through consideration”.
The Prime Minister also this month initially expressed some discomfort about those types of powers being given, despite Cabinet signing off the policy in June. He later backtracked and acknowledged they were needed as a last resort.
Chhour believed some of the concerns about the powers had been overblown and people may be jumping to worst-case scenarios.
“What disappoints me the most is this should be an issue that we should all be agreeing upon. We want these young people to be the best they can be.”
She also said other legislation gave similar powers to other people, pointing to the ability of teachers to physically restrain students in some limited circumstances.
Asked by the Herald what accountability Oranga Tamariki – the lead agency on establishing the academies – or herself would take if something was to happen to a child, Chhour said she had clear expectations.
“If it’s an illegal behaviour, then it should be dealt with through the proper legal channels. If it’s inappropriate behaviour, but it might not reach [illegal activity], I would expect an investigation to be done and made sure that no children are put in a position where they may be hurt or harmed.”
Chhour said accountability sat with Oranga Tamariki’s chief executive to ensure “the staff know there will be consequences for that behaviour”. She encouraged staff to raise anything that concerned them.
But would she, as the person creating the legislative settings for the academies, take responsibility?
“Don’t get me wrong, I’d be extremely disappointed and extremely gutted if something does happen. But I don’t control people’s behaviour. I don’t hold the hand of somebody that is acting in that way. I can’t be there every hour of every day.”
She said regardless of what politicians do, “there may be someone who may not abide by the rules”.
“Ministers do not hold the hand of the people that are doing that at that time. All we can do is put as much safety mechanisms in place as we possibly can and make sure if something does happen, it is dealt with appropriately, transparently.”
Those safeguards against abuse aren’t fully outlined in the legislation. Instead, they will be introduced another way down the line. They could include the requirements for providers to be properly assessed.
Chhour said it wasn’t unusual for legislation to be “done in parts” and the delay was because she wanted to get the safeguards “really right”.
“That’s a crucial part of making sure that young people are safe and that this programme actually achieves what we’re wanting it to achieve. Those conversations are ongoing about what that could look like.”
She made clear that secondary legislation introducing the safeguards would need to be in place before the overall MSA scheme came into force.
“So I think we need to stop going to worst-case scenario ... and get in behind supporting these young people to actually succeed in this, because isn’t that what we all want.”
The Greens’ Tamatha Paul told the Herald the legislation shouldn’t have been introduced before the safeguards were presented or the pilot programme completed. It won’t finish until July next year.
“It is morally reprehensible that they would give such important powers to use force against our tamariki [children] without being very specific about what safeguards are in place to protect those children on the receiving end of that force,” the Green MP said.
She continued to say that there were parallels between the MSAs and bootcamps of the past, something the minister has rejected.
“If you have made this huge call to use force against some of the most vulnerable young people in our country then you better come with safeguards because otherwise you are complicit in carrying on a legacy and tradition of abuse in care of our children,” Paul said.
The Chief Children’s Commissioner, Dr Claire Achmad, also told the Herald that, from a children’s right perspective, there needed to be a move away from use of force.
“I’m really concerned that this bill seeks to extend use-of-force powers to third-party providers. It’s also concerning that safeguards around potential extended use of force in the military-style academy have not been specifically laid out in this legislation.”
She’s long been opposed to military-based approaches to youth justice as she said they aren’t grounded in evidence.
But Achmad said she recently visited the MSA pilot and “was pleased to see trauma-informed, therapeutic approaches to care and recovery underway for the rangatahi” (youth).
“While I was only there for one afternoon, I did not see military-based routines or discipline being used, so that was a positive.
“I am urging that decision-makers take careful thought and time, incorporating what has been learned in the residential part of the pilot programme and at the end of the whole pilot, including the perspectives of the rangatahi who took part in it, before making any decisions about how the programme will develop as a compulsory sentencing option.”
That’s especially important, Achmad said, given New Zealand’s recent history with abuse in state and faith-based care.
“Just last week, the Government made a formal apology for the intergenerational trauma and pain caused by abuse, and we must use this moment to galvanise real change in the way we care for children and young people in youth justice.”
Despite those calls for the legislation to be paused, Chhour, who acknowledged the state abuse survivors, told the Herald she was “absolutely” proud of it.
“I campaigned on being tougher on young people because we can’t set these young people up to fail. It doesn’t do them any favours not having consequences for bad behaviour. It becomes repetitive. It becomes ingrained in them and they know nothing else.”
The residential component of the bootcamp pilot ended in October. The 10 young men involved then began the community aspect of the scheme with a mentor for support.
However, it was revealed on Thursday, the same day the legislation passed its first reading, that one of the participants had reoffended. That prompted more calls for the legislation to be paused, but Chhour said one person reoffending shouldn’t lead to opportunities being taken away from others.
Jamie Ensor is a political reporter in the NZ Herald Press Gallery team based at Parliament. He was previously a TV reporter and digital producer in the Newshub Press Gallery office.
Sick leave entitlements are about to change, according to the PM.