Chhour’s Oranga Tamariki bill,which would allow the Government to set up military bootcamps for young offenders and create a new “young serious offender” (YSO) sentencing category has been a source of heated criticism.
Opponents are concerned about the camps’ efficacy and the ultimate effect the “intensive” programme would have on young people, who often come from disadvantaged or vulnerable backgrounds. Several participants of a bootcamp pilot have been accused of reoffending.
But Chhour says the current system is not equipped to respond effectively to youth offenders and her proposal would bring about “more immediate, intensive interventions” that would lead to long-term changes for young people.
Kapa-Kingi, the MP for Te Tai Tokerau, raised concerns about Chhour’s approach to the boot camps, youth offending and the removal of section 7AA from the Oranga Tamariki Act. During the select commitee, she asked Chhour how te ao Māori would be incorporated into the process.
“Often in your rhetoric, you refer to ancestry cannot matter more than the safety of a mokopuna, which is absolutely abhorrent to tikanga, it is abhorrent to Māori, it is abhorrent through the way in which we see the world,” Kapa-Kingi said.
Te Tai Tokerau MP Mariameno Kapa-Kingi during the swearing-in ceremony at Parliament. Photo / Mark Mitchell
When Chhour said she disagreed with the statement, Kapa-Kingi replied: “Because you’ve got a gap of knowledge, minister, you don’t understand the essence of being Māori. You don’t understand that, minister.”
Act leader David Seymour says he is “shocked and offended” by the comment and that “everybody is different in some way”.
It’s not the first time the two have locked horns. Last year, Kapa-Kingi called Chhour a party puppet in te reo Māori while in the House during a general debate and called for her to resign over her handling of Oranga Tamariki.
Te Pāti Māori said the party took “absolute issue” with the minister’s implication that ensuring tamariki remained connected to their iwi and hapū compromised their safety.
This is in reference to Government plans to remove section 7AA from the Oranga Tamariki Act, which places obligations on the agency including ensuring it considers the whakapapa of Māori children, and reduces disparities between Māori and non-Māori children.
Children Minister Karen Chhour. Photo / Mark Mitchell
“The state views our more vulnerable tamariki and their whānau through the lens of statistics. Iwi views them as whānau and understand their needs,” Kapa-Kingi said.
“The minister is working from the premise that the safety of tamariki is more important than their whakapapa – as though those two things are mutually exclusive. Connecting tamariki with their whakapapa and iwi is about keeping them safe. This was one of the key findings to come out of the Abuse in Care inquiry.
“Removing iwi partnerships and oversight from Oranga Tamariki practices has led to unjust uplifts of tamariki Māori who have then gone on to ensure abuse in state care.”
Speaking to reporters at Parliament ahead of Question Time, Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer backed Kapa-Kingi, saying the comment should be seen in the context of wider policy changes at Oranga Tamariki that affect Māori.
“I get how it is seen out of context, but absolutely in context it is about [the Government] ensuring the removal of 7AA, the way the Oranga Tamariki has been a plight on te ao Māori so yeah, I think that is what she is saying, that is the context that we support her in saying it as well.”
Ngarewa-Packer also said her party’s role was to challenge.
“You have seen it in here, specifically if we mention the day that we did the haka, on what it is like to be cornered, and felt held to ransom.”
In a statement to the Herald, Chhour said there was “no right or wrong way to be Māori”.
“As a Māori person who has experienced the care system, I can tell you there is no difference between a Māori child and any other child when it comes to care and protection. They all want to know they are loved, safe, and cared for, by those who are supposed to love them.
“So that all children can have better futures and better lives, I will continue to provide the best tools and options to support them and to help protect all children from harm – because abuse and neglect do not discriminate, whether it is rich, poor, Māori or non-Māori.
Chhour said the bootcamps were intended to help young people and to help people see their potential with opportunities to learn and grow.
Seymour says he’s “shocked and offended”
Act leader David Seymour said he was “shocked and offended” by Kapa-Kingi’s comment.
“Everybody is different in some way, if there is no area of common understanding then we are never going to be able to solve the more serious problems we have.”
During the select committee, Kapa-Kingi described Chhour’s approach as “institutionalised” – a concern shared by Green MP Tamatha Paul who suggested the use of the YSO sentencing label and uniforms for the young people could be degrading and humiliating.
Te Pāti Māori MP Mariameno Kapa-Kingi just told Karen Chhour MP in Select Committee that she doesn’t “understand the essence of being Māori” and labelled idea that the safety of a child should matter more than their ancestry as “abhorrent”.
Paul also suggested the dynamic could lead to institutionalisation – “when you’re a child being put into a uniform, it’s kind of setting them up for a lifetime where they might always be wearing a uniform and it might be a prison uniform”.
Chhour also faced a series of sharp questions from Labour’s Willow-Jean Prime. Prime asked if the bootcamp pilot had been a success. Chhour did not answer the question directly but said there had been “some learnings” and “some positives” during the in-residence part of the pilot.
Components that went well included physical activity and the young people had asked for more, Chhour said.
She also said the educational components had led to all young people gaining NCEA credits. Other positive elements include life-skill development and hearing from guest speakers.
“There were no incidences of young person on young person harm and no incidences that I am very concerned about which is actually quite interesting because with this cohort we generally do find putting a group of young people that have serious offences there are usually incidences that happen.”
