National's Erica Stanford clashes with Labour MPs over redress system for survivors abused in state care
Erica Stanford, left, and Jan Tinetti
Photo:
RNZ
National Minister Erica Stanford's scrutiny hearing descended into a political slinging match between the minister and two Labour MPs as they clashed over the redress system for survivors abused in state care.
Stanford, who in charge of the government's response, faced a grilling from Opposition MPs at Parliament on Wednesday over why an independent agency hadn't been set up to deliver on a recommendation from the Royal Commission and survivors, and why ministers
considered limiting redress for gang members
.
Labour's Jan Tinetti told the committee a "key fundamental recommendation that survivors asked for" was an independent entity so that the state - the abuser - wasn't dealing with survivors directly as part of the redress.
"The Crown had been the abuser and we are hearing daily, and we heard it today, the survivors are still feeling like the Crown is abusing them because their voice has been taken away," Tinetti said.
Tinetti asked Stanford why the government didn't take that into account and
commit to a new system
.
Stanford said "many people going through the system are very happy with the service they're getting, of course there are some people who are not".
When advice was sought on a new independent agency she said she was told: "It may not be any better than we have now and I wasn't prepared to go through that huge cost, huge time, and huge complexity to maybe not have a better outcome".
Erica Stanford
Photo:
RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
But Stanford noted an independent agency wasn't off the cards completely in the future.
However, she went on to say, "it's bewildering to me that you have such an obsession with these large complex independent agencies when the experience of late has been, when we have set these up - like Te Pukenga" the outcomes have been worse.
Tinetti was education minister under the previous government that oversaw Te Pukenga, which the coalition government is unwinding.
"I'd also like to point out the redress report that was delivered was in 2021, the previous government had a very long time to act on that - it called for an independent agency back then," Stanford said.
Jan Tinetti
Photo:
RNZ / Angus Dreaver
That remark prompted Labour's Willow-Jean Prime to interject and say a working group was set-up to design it under the previous government. Tinetti then called a point of order to mount a defence.
"I'd just like to remind that this is estimates looking forward and Chris Hipkins did apologise during his speech on the 12th of November in the House, and offered to work with the government on this.
"We don't need to go backwards... We want to know what the minister is doing, we don't need to know what the previous government didn't do, we've already acknowledged we could have moved faster. We've already made that apology," she said.
Speaking to the point of order, Stanford said she had been "directly challenged" and wanted to respond.
A back and forth of jabs continued between Stanford, Prime, and Tinetti.
"I know you don't like to hear this," the minister commented, which Prime responded to by saying, "you're disingenuous, let's be honest", while Tinetti muttered in the background "appalling, you are disappointing minister".
The National and New Zealand First members of the committee sat in silence as the war of words played out.
Earlier in the hearing, Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson raised questions about why advice had been sought on whether to limit redress for gang members.
Ultimately, ministers chose to treat gangs the same as any other survivor, but create a new pathway for serious offenders.
Stanford said she sought advice on a range of things.
"Everyone has different opinions and ideas and views. We took everything into account, I sought advice on a range of different things - it doesn't necessarily mean I believed that thing or wanted that thing - but it's important as a lawmaker... when you take your job responsibly to look at every possible thing," she said.
"I needed to make sure I had all of the evidence at hand."
Davidson queried why she even needed to ask about limiting redress for gang members when it "sends a message that the real violence that happened is only validated for some people and not others".
Stanford responded saying she went out of her way and "called gang members and invited them personally to the apology, into Parliament... that tells you everything you need to know about my beliefs".
Without all the evidence though, Stanford said she would have exposed herself to being an "uninformed lawmaker".
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
Iwi files court action against minister and DOC over Ruapehu ski fields
Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone A central North Island iwi has filed court action against Minister of Conservation Tama Potaka and the Department of Conservation (DOC) over concession made to the commercial operators of Tūroa and Whakapapa ski fields on Ruapehu. The iwi, Te Patutokotoko, alleges the Crown failed their legal obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi by failing to engage with them and actively protect their interests in their ancestral maunga by continuing to deal with private owners over them. Lead claimant Te Kurataiaha Te Wanikau Tūroa told RNZ the the iwi has been looking for a solution to the issue for years, but was "shrugged off no matter what plan we put forward". Tūroa said the iwi had spoken directly to the minister about their concerns. "We actually put in an interest for Whakapapa 18 months back, we got right to the end of it... the Crown just shut us off at the 12th hour. "It was a let down. But we didn't cry. We just carried on. That's what we're doing," Tūroa said. Earlier this year, Whakapapa Holdings Limited and Pure Tūroa were granted 10-year concession by DOC to operate the north and south sides of the maunga respectively. The previous owner went into receivership in 2022 and the successful bid by the private companies came as a relief to Ruapehu mayor Weston Kirton who said the ski fields were vital to the district's economy. Te Kurataiaha Te Wanikau Tūroa said he did not want the companies to be kicked off the mountain, but wanted the iwi to have more say on how the maunga was operated. "It's an activity that our people, and New Zealanders, and foreigners come to do. It just needs to be run better. "We still have no coexistence with iwi our people in this, and that's where the breakdown is," Tūroa said. In a statement, Conservation Minister Tama Potaka said it would not be appropriate to comment as the matter was before the courts.
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Government gives itself new RMA powers to override councils
The government has given itself new powers to override councils, if they their decisions will negatively impact economic growth, development or employment. Housing and RMA reform minister Chris Bishop has said the new regulation would stop councils stalling on housing developments. But the opposition said Bishop is annointing himself the chief council despot and it's a massive over-reach. While councils said they shouldn't be blamed for a lack of housing growth. Political reporter Giles Dexter reports. Tags: To embed this content on your own webpage, cut and paste the following: See terms of use.
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Why NZ's involvement in possible US-Iran war may hang on Europe
File photo. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone An expert in warfare law says New Zealand might struggle to stay out of a US-Iran war if the Europeans get involved. As Israel continues its attacks on Iran, the US has moved additional fighter jets and ships to the region and President Donald Trump is warning that "patience is wearing thin". Professor and specialist in the laws of war, Al Gillespie of Waikato University, said the White House may seek military or diplomatic backing from its partners. "It will be hard if the Europeans get involved because the the British and the French appear to be willing to deploy something and if we get pulled more towards the European line then it will become harder, and it will depend also what Australia does," he said. In 2003, New Zealand stood aside from Australia when it joined in the American war on Iraq. This time around, on the diplomatic front, "I really wouldn't want to call it", Gillespie said. "We [have] showed a willingness to get involved. We've been involved in the defence of the Red Sea recently. This is a step further. This is a significant step further." To back an offensive war by the US when other means had not been exhausted would be an "extreme inconsistency" with the government's stated support for the international rules-based order. Israel's attack was launched when the US and Iran were about to resume talks on Tehran's nuclear programme. Iran has accused the US of helping Israel in the attack already, with " weapons, intelligence and political backing". Legally, Trump would need approval from Congress to launch an offensive war outside the US. "In theory he can't, but he is very good at trying to sidestep these rules," Gillespie said. "If he can argue that the United States was at risk and imminent risk, then he could potentially use his authority. "Congress would probably support him if you put it to them and made the case." New Zealand was speaking the right language about adhering to the International Court of Justice, and "in theory" an illegal war by Trump could be brought to the UN Security Council, Gillespie said. The Security Council held an emergency session on 13 June where its Under-Secretary-General for political affairs said, "We must at all costs avoid a growing conflagration which would have enormous global consequences." In 1981, the council condemned an attack by Israel on nuclear site in Iraq. "You won't get that kind of consensus on the Security Council anymore," Gillespie said. New Zealand had "lost our voice" recently... such as on the war in Gaza in part, so silence might be an option over Iran, he said. "I'm not sure whether we would speak with any certainty about the illegality of what's just happened. "I'd say it's a diplomatic choice, but many of the reasons we do that are so that we don't incur the wrath of Mr Trump. "There's so many things to balance right now. There's the relationship with China, the relationship with the Middle East, there's the relationship with America, there's trade negotiations, there's security negotiations, there's AUKUS in the background, a lot of things get muddied. And so it's not clear which way New Zealand would go." Trump's "grand plan for the Middle East" was another unknown quantity. "No one's quite sure how all this fits into his equations." Emily Mosley of the Australian Institute of International Affairs said Trump was not all-powerful over Republicans in Congress and this allowed people even outside the US, to look for ways to have influence. The voting record, in how it sometimes contrasted with the social media posts emanating from the White House, showed there was room for pushback, she told an international affairs conference in Wellington on Tuesday. "The choice before us is clear: Engage with the whole breadth of American institutions and demand accountability and stability, or panic and risk eroding one of the most effective checks." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
