Children's minister Karen Chhour criticised for lack of transparency over bootcamps
Photo:
RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
Opposition MPs are criticising the children's minister for a lack of transparency regarding the government's bootcamps, despite more than $30 million dollars being allocated towards future versions of it while the pilot hasn't finished yet.
Labour's Willow Jean-Prime said the government knew the bootcamps weren't working, but refused to admit that and was "pouring more money in anyway."
Karen Chhour continues to back the pilot though, saying it was about giving young people a chance, but acknowledged the death of one participant derailed some of those taking part.
Chhour was questioned by Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori about the government's youth military academies in a scrutiny hearing on Wednesday.
She was also
grilled on contracting decisions
by Oranga Tamariki and the
latest report
from the Independent Children's Monitor on outcomes for young Māori in care.
Labour's Willow Jean-Prime.
Photo:
RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
Prime referenced the latest report evaluating the progress of the academies that she said was "uploaded quietly" onto Oranga Tamariki's website last week.
It's the second
preliminary report
and focuses on the transition of the young people in the pilot from the residential phase to the community phase.
Some of the findings included a reduction in the "seriousness and frequency of offending" and spending longer in the community were "successes", and had been observed for some but not all the teenagers in the cohort.
In terms of the reduction in offending, the final report - due later this year - would include analysis of police data.
However, it noted the small number of participants meant it was unlikely any "statistically robust conclusions" would be drawn about the impact the programme had on reoffending compared to other youth justice residences.
The report also stated the detailed design and planning of the transition phase began "late" in the residential phase, which led to a "disconnect" between the residential and community phases.
It pointed out social workers had key roles in transition and worked well with mentors but "did not have enough preparation or capacity".
Most mentors formed a close relationship with the teenager they were supporting, but there was a lack of clarity on some aspects of the mentor role itself.
Prime quizzed the minister on why nobody was alerted to the report being released publicly, given the "public interest" in the issue.
Chhour said she wouldn't normally alert people personally when a report was released.
Prime then asked - from the evaluation - whether the minister was confident the experiment had been a success, given the coalition was investing an additional $33 million into military style academies, and whether it was a good response to youth offending.
Chhour said it wasn't the only response to youth offending, and she "absolutely" supported the initiative, but said she wasn't in a place to say whether it had been a success or not.
"Yet - you're giving it $33 million?" Prime interjected.
"This is still in a pilot stage," Chhour said, "it still has a review process to go through once the pilot has ended."
"What I am confident about is the legislation that's going through allows us to pivot, to learn from things that may not have worked within the pilot, and actually pivot to change the things that did work within the pilot, so the legislation allows for that."
Prime asked whether it had led to a reduction in reoffending, saying that was the "primary objective" of the academies.
Chhour rejected that, saying the primary objective was to give young people a chance not to enter the correction system.
She refused to provide any detail on how many young people had reoffended.
Prime noted the report had stated six of the participants had been interviewed in the residence during the community phase, suggesting that meant 60 percent of participants had reoffended.
Prime pointed to the academy being entrenched into law before the pilot was completed, saying the report didn't give any reoffending rate which was "disappointing".
"You all know that is the information that we are seeking to be able to assess whether this is working."
Kahurangi Carter.
Photo:
VNP / Phil Smith
The Greens' Kahurangi Carter also said the releasing of the report hadn't been a "transparent process" because media and politicians weren't alerted. She asked whether the rangatahi "actually had" support in the community, which was key to the pilot.
National Director of Youth Justice Residences and Home at Oranga Tamariki, Iain Chapman, said it was a pilot and "you learn from a pilot".
He said there'd been elements of success in the residence phase, but some "learnings" from the transition to community phase.
Those lessons would be taken, along with the evaluation toward the end of the year, and inform any future military style academy.
Labour's Helen White then called the project a "flop" and criticised the Minister for funding her "pet project" rather than allocating that money toward reducing the amount of violence in society which leads to the deaths of women and children.
Helen White.
Photo:
VNP / Phil Smith
Chhour responded by saying it was "disingenuous" to "sit there and yell across this table like I'm not doing anything to protect these young people."
"It's not either or ... we have to work at both ends of this" she said.
White doubled down, saying violence was a crisis, and did the Minister agree "we have to be open minded if something doesn't work, and redirect money into things that do work."
Chhour agreed, saying that was exactly why there had been a review of all contracts, and White interjected asking "would you like to go there?" and Prime attempting to offer the Auditor-General's findings.
Chair of the committee Joseph Mooney.
Photo:
RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
Chair of the committee Joseph Mooney called for the question to be answered, with Prime scoffing in frustration.
"I absolutely do agree we have to make sure there are outcomes for the money we are spending on our contracts, which is what the review process was about moving forward," Chhour replied.
Prime then tried to get further detail about future military academies, such as where and when they would run, what the projected numbers were for those who would take part, and the cost per participant.
Chhour said she couldn't talk about the next iteration because it was still a "pilot" and decisions hadn't yet been made as to how that money would be allocated once the pilot had ended.
"We look at the learnings from the pilot, and once the legislation goes through, then we can make some of those decisions. But I can't give you answers on decisions that haven't been made yet."
Prime pointed out there was a budget allocation for it, so there must be some information or modelling about the future versions, and queried how the specific allocation of money was decided on.
Chhour said the money was there to provide certainty that contracts can be procured where necessary.
She said the money may not be spent, or she may need to bid for more money.
Chapman also chimed in saying there were a lot of "variables" but there were no definite decisions.
Prime said multiple times her question hadn't been answered, raising a point of order, to which Chair Joseph Mooney decided the question had been addressed and moved on.
The final evaluation of the bootcamp pilot will be released in late 2025.
Kahurangi Carter also raised the report which found Oranga Tamariki was "poorly prepared" to carry out its contracting round during the 2024/25 financial year, and fell short of expectations for public organisations.
The report stated the effects of the decisions by the child protection agency were "still not known" and this was "unacceptable".
Carter asked whether Minister accepted the findings, to which she said she accepted the processes that were happening could not continue, and there had to be accountability for contracts.
"I'm never going to apologise," Chhour said.
She said the Auditor-General had a right to say what he did, but there'd been no scrutiny or accountability on contracts, and she wouldn't apologise for asking the agency to have outcomes for the money it was spending to protect children.
Asked whether she stood by her statement that Oranga Tamariki had been a cash-cow for community service providers, Chhour said "absolutely I stand by that statement".
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
NZ Herald
3 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Shane Te Pou: Tāmaki Makaurau byelection a chance to test out campaign machine
No electorate belongs to any party and Peeni Henare (who was Tāmaki Makaurau's MP for three terms until he lost to Kemp by 42 votes) has every right to try to win the seat back. And, contrary to some claims that Henare winning would mean fewer Māori in Parliament, if he wins the electorate, Labour will have an empty list seat, with the next in line being the wāhine Māori Georgie Dansey. Labour's Peeni Henare was Tāmaki Makaurau's MP for three terms and is fighting to win the seat back. Photo / Mark Mitchell Having a contested campaign is good for Labour and Te Pāti Māori. It will allow both parties to give their election campaign machines a run and put forward their vision to people who have been hard hit by this Government's poor decisions and negligence. According to the latest census, construction is the biggest employer for Tāmaki Makaurau voters. It's also been a sector that's been hammered by the Government stopping large infrastructure projects mid-stream and cutting off funding for building more state houses. Oriini Kaipara is the Te Pāti Māori candidate for the Tāmaki Makaurau byelection. Photo / Supplied Fifteen thousand construction jobs have been lost in the past two years. Nationwide, the economy has lost 34,000 jobs in the past year and Māori unemployment is over 10%. Rising costs for basics such as food, GP visits, prescriptions, and electricity are hitting whānau who are dealing with job losses, all while being characterised as dole bludgers by a Government that seemingly has no solutions. With 79% of Tāmaki Makaurau voters renting, they're also feeling the pinch of continuing rent rises. The reality is most of our people work, but no matter how hard they work, even holding down two jobs, they just cannot get ahead in life. Many whānau live in overcrowded homes, with the constant spectre of having nowhere to live as the Government has brought back no-cause evictions and cut off access to emergency housing. Anyone who walks the streets of our largest city knows that the number of homeless people in Tāmaki Makaurau is growing, and many of them are Māori. Labour says its focus is on jobs, homes, health and the cost of living. Those are clearly key issues for voters, who are unimpressed by this Government's lack of delivery and their carelessness towards the hurt people are feeling. But voters aren't yet ready to fully embrace Labour – probably because of the lack of a vision and policy to go with those priorities. This byelection is an opportunity for Labour to start putting some meat on those bones and present themselves as an alternative government that people can trust with their vote. For Te Pāti Māori, holding on to Tāmaki Makaurau will be an important goal, to cement their hold on the Māori seats and prove that 2023 wasn't a passing high-tide mark, like 2008 was. It will also be a test of how they handle more mainstream media attention. Next year, National will spend a huge amount of money and energy trying to show that a vote for Labour is a vote for Te Pāti Māori and that they are too extreme to be let near power. It will be up to Te Pāti Māori to prove that fear-mongering wrong. Labour and Te Pāti Māori will need to use this byelection to show they can compete while keeping things civil and positive. Oriini Kaipara and Peeni Henare are excellent candidates, and I'm not making a pick on who will win. I am confident that whoever is elected will be able to represent our people well. I hope that the winner will work tirelessly for more jobs, more houses and better public services. Two years of cuts and negligence have left our people hurting. It's time for some hope.
RNZ News
3 hours ago
- RNZ News
No penalty clauses paid on stalled Waiouru army base housing project
Waiouru military training camp Photo: Google Maps The Defence Force (NZDF) says it has not paid any penalty clauses associated with its housing project at Waiouru army base . Penalty clauses can be paid when contractors or subcontractors sign up to projects that do not then go ahead. The $50 million-plus project has stalled , though both defence and Ngāti Rangi iwi consider it urgent, and the force issued a tender over a year ago for 50 new homes. No building has taken place. The NZDF once again refused to tell RNZ why it was still in negotiations with the iwi over the housing. It had appeared the talks were settled before it issued last year's tender. "Negotiations in relation to this matter remain underway. Accordingly, this information is withheld in full... to enable negotiations to be carried out without prejudice or disadvantage," it said in a response to a request under the Offiicial Information Act. "The NZDF's relationship with local iwi has not changed and remains vital to our use of the Waiouru Military Training Area," it added. It also said no penalty clauses had been paid, either related to the new builds or the retrofit upgrade of existing army rental houses. Defence housing and other facilities were very rundown, interfering with its military performance and leading to some personnel quitting, its own reports showed. It had an Estate Investment Committee that "provides performance monitoring, oversight, and direction", according to its annual report. But when RNZ asked for the latest three performance management reports by the committee, NZDF replied: "No reports are generated by the New Zealand Defence Force's Estate Investment Committee." It repeated this in relation to its Technology Governance Committee, when RNZ asked for its latest reports, too. A lot of the NZDF's information technology was old and needed replacing, or were in the middle of years-long projects. Funding was set aside in Budget 2025 for this.
NZ Herald
4 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Dropkicks? Shouldn't we make it easier for people to vote?
This week, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith announced what he described as a 'significant, but necessary change' to New Zealand's electoral laws. He said this will address 'strain on the system'. The most controversial of these changes is stopping same-day enrolment for voters in a general election. Same-day enrolments are counted as special votes, which can take about 10 times longer to count than ordinary votes. Special votes have become more common in recent elections and a Regulatory Impact Statement from the Ministry of Justice said there had been an explosion as more people enrolled or updated their details on the day they voted. There were about 300,000 to 350,000 same-day special votes cast at the last election. The total number of special votes was 602,000, or about 20.9% of all ticks made. The Electoral Commission forecasts this will rise to 739,000 special votes in the 2026 election. So, to ensure the final results for our election don't take too long, the ability to enrol to vote will stop 13 days before election day. Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour said anyone who can't get their A into G in time was a 'dropkick'. 'I'm a bit sick of dropkicks who can't get their lives organised to follow the law, which registering to vote is a legal requirement. Then going and voting to tax away hard-working people's money and have people that make laws that restrict their freedoms.' After his somewhat partisan comment, Seymour went on tell reporters, 'If you can't be bothered doing that, maybe you don't care so much.' But it is obvious these people – hundreds of thousands of Kiwis – do care. They care enough about our democracy and the future of this country to go to a polling station on election day, register and vote. The Act leader also said people are fighting around the world for the chance to vote in a democracy. This is true, but the irony appeared totally lost on Seymour as he argued about the merits of a law that would restrict the opportunity for people to do just that. This country loves a battler and treating thousands of everyday New Zealanders with disdain rarely returns a positive result. Seymour might be well served to dropkick his descriptor quickly, or the battlers may dropkick him at the polls. Along with concerns about turnout, the Electoral Commission advised that special votes are more likely to come from areas with high Asian, Māori and Pacific communities. Younger people are also more likely to cast special votes – particularly first-time voters. Labour leader Chris Hipkins called the proposed changes 'draconian'. That is hyperbole. But he is right that it's anti-democratic. Perhaps any law that restricts a person's opportunity to vote should require a supermajority in Parliament? This might also stop the ridiculous see-sawing we see every government cycle around prisoner voting. Sign up to the Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
