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
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Man pleads guilty over 'coward punch' that killed Daniel Nganeko
Daniel Nganeko. Photo: Supplied A man has pleaded guilty to manslaughter over an unprovoked attack outside a rugby clubroom in Taranaki. Daytona Thompson fatally punched Daniel Nganeko last month. A big court gathered outside the High Court at New Plymouth for today's hearing, many wearing white t-shirts bearing the image of Nganeko and the slogan "March for Daniel, March for Change". Lawyers for 22-year-old Thompson asked that a restorative justice conference be considered. He was remanded in custody until his sentencing in October. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Why has trust in news fallen? The answer is more complicated than we thought
By Greg Treadwell, Merja Myllylahti of In April only one in three people said they trusted the media in general - a slight fall from last year. Photo: Supplied / Stuff / NZ Herald / Newsroom / ODT / TVNZ We live in an age of declining trust in public institutions: Parliament, the health and education systems, courts and police have all suffered over the past decade, both in New Zealand and internationally. And, of course, trust in the news has declined precipitously, according to regular surveys, including our own research. So, it might be tempting to roll declining trust in news media into this wider decline of trust in public institutions in general. But this is where our research disagrees . News isn't just another institution like the state, a corporation or a non-profit organisation. Ideally, it's the democratic expression of the public interest in these things. An institutional approach may help us explore the structural issues democracies face (for example, critiquing the nature of media ownership). But it also generalises, and risks obscuring the specifics of the trust problem public interest journalism faces. Nor does it recognise the distinctiveness of the " social contract of the press " - the necessary bond of trust between journalism and its audiences, which is key to the success of the wider social contract between the public and its institutions. Our research shows trust in news has plummeted from 58 percent of New Zealanders agreeing they can trust "most of the news most of the time" in 2020, to just 32 percent in 2025. Survey respondents tell us they perceive the news to be politically biased (both left and right), and because too much seems to be opinion masquerading as news. These seemed very different from the trust issues faced by government, business and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). Declining trust in those institutions has been driven more by wars, financial crises, the rise of populism and the Covid pandemic. To differentiate journalism's trust issues, we explored whether falling trust in news was (or wasn't) linked to declines in trust in other social institutions. We looked at research from the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism and the global Edelman Trust Barometer , as well as our own research. We found the trajectories of trust levels for other social institutions - governments, business, NGOs - showed clear links to each other as they rose and fell, more or less in sync, over time. Trust in news, however, has been in its own lane, perhaps influenced by the others, but clearly not tethered to them. A fall in trust in government and politics, in other words, is not a predictor of a fall in trust in news. Globally, we found trust in government, business and NGOs fell and then rose, roughly together, from 2020 to 2024. While not tracking each other exactly, there's a clear grouping of data points. From 2020, trust in all of them (including media in general - television, internet, radio and movies) fell rapidly and levelled out in 2021 before rising again slightly by 2024. Trust in news itself, however, behaved in almost exactly opposite ways, rising from 2020 to 2021 before falling again and levelling out in 2023. Global trust in media, news and social institutions has dropped since the Covid-19 pandemic. Photo: The Conversation Given its impact, the global pandemic is likely a cause for these changes in 2020. However, as trust in government fell, news media - to which the public has historically turned in a crisis - actually rose. In Aotearoa New Zealand, things were very different. While it fell globally, trust in institutions in New Zealand rose from 2020, before falling in 2022. Trust in news, however, was not rising in the early days of the pandemic as it was elsewhere. It was falling. And it continued to fall steadily until 2023. (In 2024, it would fall even more dramatically, but that data was not captured by this study.) A drop in trust in the media needs to be addressed separately from the drop in trust of government and non-government institutions. Photo: The Conversation Both sets of data - global and local - show trust in news doing largely the opposite of what trust in government and other institutions has been doing, rising when they were falling and vice versa. When journalism does its job well and exposes failings in government, we would indeed expect one to rise and the other to fall. So, we can see there may well be links between changes in levels of trust. But we can also see trust levels are not responding in unison to external socio-political pressures. In focus groups, we explored if there were connections between trust in news and trust in government. Older New Zealanders who didn't trust the news told us there were institutions they mistrusted: banks, insurance companies and universities, some to very high levels, and mostly born from personal experience. But they did not particularly mistrust government as an institution. And we found no direct link between their mistrust of news and their mistrust of other social institutions. Which supports the evidence we found in the global and local trust data trends. It seems the trust problems democracies have with their news services need to be addressed on their own terms, not as part of an overall picture. This story was originally published on The Conversation.
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Resource Management Act changes will allow power plants to be built faster
Energy Resources Aotearoa chief executive John Carnegie. Photo: Supplied / Rob Tucker A group representing big energy producers said changes to the Resource Management Act (RMA) will allow power plants to be built faster, and reduce price volatility in the electricity market. Parliament passed the amendment yesterday, which means councils will now need to grant consents for certain energy infrastructure within a year. Energy Resources Aotearoa's chief executive, John Carnegie, told Morning Report that it's great news for electricity consumers - big and small. He said the slow consenting processes previously had added to costs and uncertainty. Carnegie said more he's now expecting faster and more certain consenting processes for both fossil fuel and renewable power generation. It has potential to take price volatility out of the electricity market, and deliver a more resilient system that can better handle unexpected weather he events, he said. Carnegie said while renewables remain the backbone of the electricity system, New Zealand needs more fossil fuel and gas generating plants to "fill the gaps" when hydro, solar and wind outputs are low. He said the country needs to build capacity and not be responding in crisis mode. The tight supply of gas meant more demand for back up power, said Carnegie. When asked about the carbon and environmental costs the changes may bring, Carnegie said New Zealand would otherwise be facing energy scarcity and skyrocketing prices. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
