Abuse in care: Cabinet considered limiting gang members' redress
Photo:
RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
Cabinet sought advice on limiting redress for gang members and serious criminals, but ultimately chose to treat gangs the same as any other survivor and create a new pathway for serious offenders.
Information obtained by RNZ reveals the government was advised against a "blanket exclusion" because it risks compromising trust in the integrity of the Crown's response to the Royal Commission into Abuse in care.
The advice described any proposal that would deny serious offenders or gang members access to the redress system would run "directly counter" to the Royal Commission's reports.
Abuse survivor and former gang member Feke Taito says it is "unconscionable" the government considered leaving them out at all: "It just stunned me, actually."
Minister in charge of the Crown's response Erica Stanford
announced the coalition's plan for survivor redress last month
, specifying a new process for claims from survivors who are also serious sexual and/or violent offenders who have been sentenced to five years or more in prison (high tariff offenders).
A spokesperson for Stanford told RNZ she sought the advice about gang members and serious offenders on behalf of ministers who wanted to "consider the matter" of limiting redress.
The spokesperson said Stanford accepted findings from the Royal Commission regarding the connection between abuse in care and subsequent gang membership.
A briefing paper from the Crown Response to the Abuse in Care inquiry was titled 'Redress options for high tariff offenders and gang members'.
It was addressed to Stanford, Lead Coordination Minister for the Crown Response; Simeon Brown, Minister of Health; and Louise Upston, Minister for Social Development and Employment, who also has responsibility for redress decisions under the Children's portfolio (transferred from Karen Chhour). Minister of Justice Paul Goldsmith was also looped in.
In November last year, coalition members
would not say
whether gang members would be excluded or not.
The briefing - dated 3 April - said it provided initial advice and options on the "legal and operational implications" of policy changes that would "limit" high tariff offenders' and gang members' entitlement to redress payments under the system.
It recommended maintaining the status quo in which state claims agencies treat claimants "equally" and provide redress payments based on the "merits of their claim."
"Claimants receive and have free use of any redress payments due to them. An exception is prisoners who do not have an external bank account to be paid into."
It specified a "blanket exclusion of high tariff offenders and/or gang members from the state redress system" would likely reduce trust in the integrity of the Crown's response to the Royal Commission and was not recommended by officials.
It also noted officials had not been able to identify any options for "imposing controls on access to redress" based only on someone's status as a gang member that were "operationally workable". This was also advised against.
It later explained the officials had not been able to identify a "solid basis" for establishing whether someone is a gang member.
Corrections holds some information on gang affiliation of the current prison population it said, but noted there would be issues with the comprehensiveness, accuracy and timeliness of that information. It also said the Privacy Commissioner was unlikely to be supportive of new legislation enabling that information to be shared.
The briefing explained the Royal Commission had recommended redress should be "open to all survivors" including those in prison or with a criminal record.
It stated the Royal Commission had pointed to the "high correlation" between abuse in care and high rates of criminal behaviour, imprisonment and the membership of gangs later on, and recommended that context be considered in the design of any new redress system.
"Accordingly, any proposal to deny high tariff offenders or gang members access to the redress system would run directly counter to the Royal Commission's reports," the briefing said.
"Moreover, it would likely compromise trust in the integrity of the Crown's response to the Royal Commission and whether the Crown has fully engaged with the Royal Commission's proceedings and the case studies and evidence set out in its reports."
The briefing referenced two findings from the Royal Commission, the "Pathways to Prison" and "Pathways to Gang Membership" through State-care.
"Previous research has found that one in five, and sometimes as many as one in three, individuals who went through social welfare residences during the Inquiry period went on to serve a criminal custodial sentence later in life," it said, and noted that experience was worse for Māori survivors.
"Many Māori survivors shared how their time in care introduced them to gangs and gang life.
"Joining was often in response to the violence, isolation and disconnection they experienced in care, including disconnection from their identity, culture, whānau, communities and society."
Fa'afete (Feke) Taito
is now the chairman of survivor-led organisation Te Rōpu Toiora.
He said he was stunned to learn the government had considered excluding gang members, but felt it confirmed what he thought the government was trying to do.
"Trying to suppress us at the margins, trying to drive us even further down.
"You know, the whole thing to me is unconscionable."
He said it read like the government was trying to prevent offenders with criminal records and gang members from receiving any type of redress.
"How can they do that?
"After they the Royal Commission inquiry clearly states the majority of these offenders and gang members, myself included, we joined and we connected with these gangs because of the abuse we suffered there, in state care, in these boys homes."
Taito said it made him distrust the government more, and felt like the government was looking for options of "getting out of having to pay or compensate" survivors the state itself had harmed.
He said this, along with the decision
not to set up an entirely new system for redress
- despite the prime minister promising to do so - showed he could not expect any justice from this government.
He was glad the advice from Crown officials told the government it couldn't go ahead with those options, and that the Crown Response Office engaged with survivors.
"Because it's nothing about us unless it's from us."
The briefing paper said the lead coordination minister for the government's response had commissioned advice on the matter for redress Ministers and the Minister of Justice.
A spokesperson for Stanford said gang members weren't treated differently to any other survivor in regard to seeking redress and that will continue to be the case.
However, there will be a "new pathway" for new claims from serious violent and/or sexual offenders sentenced to five years or more in prison. That was decided after further advice from officials which highlighted "similar regimes" in Scotland and Australia.
That information should be proactively released by Cabinet this week.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
43 minutes ago
- RNZ News
What you need to know about Auckland's licensing trust elections
The Trusts chief executive Allan Pollard. Photo: Supplied/LDR Aucklanders are being urged to vote for trustees for the five alcohol licensing trusts in the region, as the local elections loom. The local elections will be held from September 9 - October 11, and while most of the attention will be on city councillors and mayoral hopefuls, voters will also decide who will lead their licensing trusts. Auckland has five licensing trusts, with only two - Portage and Waitakere, collectively known as The Trusts - having the authority to grant liquor licences in West Auckland. Established in the country in the 1960s and 70s, the trusts model was set up as a community initiative to control the sale of alcohol and decide how surplus profits are returned to the community. The Trusts chief executive Allan Pollard said people often didn't realise that licensing trusts were included in the local elections. "Licensing trusts are just the tip of the niche election iceberg," Pollard said. "When local elections roll around in, between these and the general election, you might think that's more than enough democracy to fill your brain. "But in reality, there are a number of other things you can vote on that most Kiwis don't realise are on the table." Voting numbers for licensing trusts haven't been strong. In the last local elections, less than 50 percent of registered voters selected their trustees. Pollard said voter turnout for the last Waitākere Local Board election was 15,661 votes, approximately 40 percent of eligible voters. He hoped that would change come September. "Fundamentaly we all want what's best for the community. People come at it from different angles and that's democracy and at the end of the day, people will decide." He also hoped more young people would step up and consider being nominated for one of the 35 trustee positions vacant in the five licensing trusts. The other trusts are Mt Wellington, Birkenhead and Wiri in south Auckland, who all manage and own hospitality venues and commercial real estate assets. Together with proceeds from gaming machines, licensing trusts provide funding to community groups in their districts. "New Zealand is home to a unique system of licensing trusts - community-owned entities that hold exclusive rights to sell alcohol in certain areas," Pollard said. While alcohol monopolies exist in other parts of the world, what makes the NZ model different was that it was truly democratic and community-led, he said. "In West Auckland, we're mandated to operate off-licenses, hotels and taverns. A responsibility we take seriously weighing community benefit against accessibility and alcohol harm. "Then, surplus profits from those retail and hospitality operations are reinvested back into the community." Pollard said the West Auckland trusts granted $1.1 million to 52 community-led initiatives across the district this year. Nominations for the local elections, including licensing trusts, close on 1 August. Voting opens on 11 September and closes at noon on 11 October. Final results will be announced on 13-17 October. LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.
1News
an hour ago
- 1News
Nephew allegedly murdered relative in his 80s during Sydney home invasion
Failing to locate stacks of cash during a home invasion, a money-hungry masked man fatally beat a relative in his 80s over the head before fleeing the scene, a jury has heard. Kalim Saliba was asleep in his lounge room while his wife Shahidy Saliba watched television in their western Sydney home in the wee hours of April 28, 2020. This peaceful scene was shattered after a masked man broke in just after midnight. Minutes later, the couple - who were both in their 80s - were struck over the head in their Cherrybrook garage with Shahidy losing consciousness and Kalim collapsing to the floor and dying later in hospital. "Where is the money?" the masked man said before attacking the couple, a NSW Supreme Court trial was told on Monday. ADVERTISEMENT Tony Phillip Tadrosse, 60, and Danny Stephen, 35, have both pleaded not guilty to murdering Kalim and assaulting Shahidy while armed and intending to rob and wound her. Stephen is one of the elderly couple's great nephews, and Tadrosse is an extended relative. The pair sat before a jury on Monday as Crown Prosecutor Eric Balodis described how Shahidy and her husband heard someone breaking the glass at the front of their home. They soon saw a masked man with a bag inside, he said. Balodis told the jury there might have been a second person inside the house making noise upstairs and a possible third person in a car driving outside. Two men were charged with the murder of Kalim Saliba. (Source: Supplied) He said while Tadrosse or Stephens weren't identified within the Cherrybrook home, there was a strong circumstantial case they were there at the time. ADVERTISEMENT The motive was financial, Balodis said, with the two men on the lookout for money. Despite not having money in his bank account, Tadrosse called to inquire about getting expensive dental implants the morning before the home invasion, the prosecutor said. It was well-known amongst the extended family Kalim and his wife were old-fashioned with their money, preferring to keep cash in a safe rather than digitally, the jury was told. Tadrosse and Stephens formed a plan to break into the property, knowing one of the occupants could be killed or suffer grievous bodily harm, the prosecutor said. Through this joint criminal enterprise, the pair were guilty of murder, he argued. The Crown's case relies heavily on CCTV footage showing a Hilux and an Audi driving through the streets of Cherrybrook doing "reconnaissance" of the house in the hours before the home invasion. Tadrosse and Stephen had access to these vehicles, Balodis said. ADVERTISEMENT The timing of calls made between phone numbers allegedly belonging to the two co-accused aligned with the events of that night, jurors heard. After returning to his Kings Cross home, Tadrosse tried to establish an alibi by calling the coronavirus hotline and saying he had woken up in a cold sweat, Balodis argued. The morning's headlines in 90 seconds, including the atmospheric river arrives, Epstein's girlfriend pushes for appeal, and Jennifer Lopez's wardrobe malfunction. (Source: Breakfast) Both men deny any involvement in the events of that tragic night. "Danny Stephen didn't murder Kalim Saliba or injure his wife Shahidy," defence barrister Karl Prince said. Tadrosse's barrister Madeleine Avenell SC said there was no doubt the home invasion was a "terrible incident" with a "terrible outcome". However, her client also rejected allegations he was there. If the more serious charges can't be proven, the jury can consider alternative charges of manslaughter and assault with intent to rob. The trial continues on Tuesday.
NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
National MPs on how Kiwis will react to board members' pay hike, cost of living struggles
National Party MPs believe an 80% hike to the pay framework for certain Crown board members is appropriate to lure the right talent, but some are also acknowledging Kiwis facing cost of living issues may struggle with the idea. The increase, revealed by the Herald yesterday following the quiet
