Building A Truly Safe And Capable Workforce: What The $71.5 Million Investment Must Deliver
Today Minister Erica Stanford announced as part of the $774 million investment to improve the current redress system for survivors of abuse in state care, changes would be made that will endeavour to "prevent, identify, and respond to abuse in the future".
Within this package, $71.5 million has been earmarked specifically for "building a capable and safe care workforce for children and vulnerable adults."
Safeguarding Children Chief Executive Willow Duffy says this funding represents an opportunity – but only if it is deployed it to address the fundamental systemic failures that continue to put vulnerable New Zealanders at risk.
'As we consider this $71.5 million investment in building a safe and capable workforce there are some key questions we must ask. Who is included in this workforce? Does it include teachers, doctors, nurses? These occupations all have a role to play in keeping our children safe.
Duffy says that every New Zealander deserves to know exactly how this funding will create care environments where abuse becomes truly exceptional rather than predictable.
'Until we build a workforce where safeguarding isn't just a compliance exercise but a fundamental professional value, we'll continue seeing preventable harm to those most dependent on our protection.
'The $71.5 million must deliver transformational change in how we select, train, support, and hold accountable those entrusted with our most vulnerable citizens. We need more than just incremental improvements.'
Duffy says the $71.5 million allocation could be transformative if it delivers:
A nationwide credentialing system similar to Australia's Blue Card—providing consistent vetting standards across all care settings
Specific codes of conduct that prioritise the prevention of abuse
Mandatory, comprehensive safeguarding training for all care providers and their leadership
Clear consequences for organisations that fail to maintain safeguarding standards
Structural supports that elevate care work as a valued, professional career path.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Spinoff
39 minutes ago
- The Spinoff
The water cremation floodgates are officially open in Aotearoa
It's the biggest change to the funeral industry in over a century, and there's already a queue forming. This month, a Christchurch woman named Margaret made history as the first person in New Zealander to be water cremated. 'She had been unwell for some time, and she wanted to be the first,' says Debbie Richards, founder of Water Cremation New Zealand. 'She was a very adventurous woman and a bit of a pioneer, and she'll always be a very special person to me.' A gold plaque with Margaret's name on it was unveiled last week in the water crematorium at Bell, Lamb and Trotter in Ōtautahi, one of the country's oldest funeral homes. Richards and managing director Andrew Bell then cut the giant red ribbon around the resomator, the giant SUV-sized stainless steel machine responsible for water cremation. A patter of polite applause heralded the arrival of a groundbreaking new technology for people seeking a more eco-friendly option in death. Despite this being the biggest thing to happen to dying in Aotearoa in about 100 years, the opening ceremony was relatively small. Notable guests included Margaret's family, representatives from Ngāi Tahu, Labour MP Duncan Webb and Reverend Dr Peter Carrell. Before he led the room in prayer, he apologised for not being able to stay for food and drink afterwards. 'As it happens, I have a funeral to go to on the other side of the city,' he said. Richards, a former midwife and nurse, has been championing water cremation since 2018. During the water cremation process, the body is wrapped in a shroud and dissolved in a 95% water 5% alkaline solution. After four or so hours, all that is left are 'pure white' bones (given to the family as ashes), any implants or prosthesis (which are recycled), and a sterile liquid (which enters the wastewater system). It is 90% less harmful to the environment than flame cremation, which produces 242kg of carbon dioxide (roughly the same amount as driving a petrol car from Christchurch to Cape Reinga). After the ribbon cutting ceremony, I got chatting to Dean Fisher who was an early adopter of water cremation when working with donated bodies at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota and had travelled all the way over here for the opening. He explained that flame cremation is more 'violent' than the watery alternative, which is much closer to the natural decomposition process found in soil. 'We're just gently moving liquid around you, breaking down soft tissue and leaving the bone. More or less, we are skeletonising the body.' A woman offered me a chicken skewer, and I politely declined. Squeamishness aside, there's an undeniably attractive environmental appeal here – the Christchurch resomator has a carbon footprint of zero at the point of use. 'These aren't putting anything into the atmosphere at all,' says Fisher. 'They're all throughout the US and Europe now, people see the environmental side of this and they just love it. 'I'm so happy for the people of New Zealand, because now you have another choice. It might not be your choice, but it's giving a choice for somebody else,' Fisher adds. Currently around 80% of New Zealanders are cremated by flame (average cost of $5,000), the remaining opting for either plot burials (which costs an average of $10,000) or natural burials (average cost just under $5,000). Water cremation doesn't require a casket and is a slightly more affordable option than flame, arriving at a time where funeral costs are in the spotlight. Although the environmental benefits are clear, it hasn't been easy for Richards to swim against the tide. The last major advancement in the local funeral industry came in 1909 with the first flame cremation, and prior to that was embalming in 1896. The Burial and Cremation Act was written in 1964 – so old that it still mentions pounds and shillings – so trying to pioneer something new after over a century of stasis was a regulatory 'rollercoaster', says Richards ('I don't want to talk about the council,' she would jibe in her opening speech.) One of the last and most significant hurdles was securing a water permit from the Christchurch City Council to release the processed liquid into the water treatment system. Richards worked closely with water engineers, had an independent report written by GHD, and crucially secured local support from mana whenua. 'It's always hardest being the first – we knew were always going to be the ones that would be the most closely scrutinised, so we've just had to be completely transparent and share all the knowledge that we have,' she says. And with Richards having done the hard yards in Ōtautahi with Bell, Lamb and Trotter, the floodgates are now open for more people in the funeral industry to follow suit. 'It's the first in the country, but I believe there's going to be a few people not too far behind us,' says Richards. 'I'm getting emails from city councils around the country, wanting to know what we've done and how we've done it, so they can replicate and be able to offer the process as well. I would like to help people, because I want this to be an option for everybody in New Zealand.' Reflecting on nearly a decade of work to bring water cremation to Aotearoa, Richards says stubbornness helped a great deal. 'I just hung in there and I didn't give up,' she laughs. 'People have wanted me to go away, and I just haven't.' With people now ringing her from all around the country seeking guidance about council regulations and water treatment, she says that her main piece of advice is staying the course. 'Keep going and don't let them turn you away. You can get there in the end – you just have to keep putting one foot in front of the other.'
Otago Daily Times
2 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Attitude to eye health criticised
A multinational pharmaceutical company has stooped to "punching down" on New Zealand's disabled community while promoting its vision loss treatment, a Dunedin advocate says. Market research by the New Zealand arm of Roche, a Swiss multinational holding healthcare company, was released last week and said while most people understood the importance of vision, public awareness of specific eye conditions, symptoms and how to prevent vision loss remained low. "New Zealanders overwhelmingly value their vision above all other senses according to recent market research, with participants saying they'd be willing to lose 5.6 years of perfect health, rather than live a decade without sight," the company's media release began. In New Zealand, Roche distributes Vabysmo, a medicine approved by MedSafe to treat age-related macular degeneration, the leading cause of blindness in the country. Blind and low vision advocate and Dunedin resident Julie Woods, who is also known as "That Blind Woman", said it "distresses" her the company was comparing hypothetical trade-offs between life expectancy and vision loss. "That just shows how afraid people are of vision loss," she said. "You can live a perfectly good life without vision, but you can't without your health." She said preserving eye health was "obviously" a great cause. "But it doesn't give organisations the right to push their own product and put down [or punch] down a community of people." Ms Woods said Roche's approach spoke to a medical model of disability which was: "we can't fix you, therefore you're broken". "Whereas the social model of disability says that we are disabled by the barriers that society creates, and we're not broken and we're not less than." She said Roche's use of New Zealanders' fears of not seeing loved ones' faces or recognising facial expressions, body language and social cues was "bull...." and was emotive toward sighted people. A Roche spokesperson said the market research was based on a similar study conducted in the United Kingdom and the company sought guidance from professionals within the eye community, including a patient advocacy group. "Their advice advocated for raising awareness about the importance of eye health and regular eye examinations to prevent irreversible, yet preventable, vision loss," the spokesperson said. "The intent of the campaign was to raise awareness of the importance of eye health and preventable vision loss, encouraging individuals to get their eyes tested or seek help if they are experiencing symptoms." The spokesperson said Roche respected Ms Woods' opinion and acknowledged her advocacy for the blind and low vision community in New Zealand.
RNZ News
13 hours ago
- RNZ News
Potential insurance costs cast shadow over parent visa
Christchurch resident Xiuyun Liu (top left) with her parents, husband and children. Photo: Supplied Insurance experts have raised concerns about potential costs for the long-awaited Parent Boost Visa that was announced by the government last weekend. Immigration Minister Erica Stanford said Sunday the visa would allow parents of citizens and residents to stay in New Zealand for up to five years, with an opportunity for the visa to be extended another five years. Included in the health and income conditions of the visa was a requirement for the parents to obtain sufficient health insurance to cover the first 12 months of their stay. Anyone staying longer than a year would need to renew their health insurance policies for the duration of their stay. Christchurch resident Xiuyun Liu questioned whether the insurance conditions could make it harder for her parents to take advantage of the new visa. Her parents, 70 and 73, had been on visitor and study visas to stay in New Zealand, helping her to look after her young children. "I think it's good that the policy is out now. At least we have hope for the next five years," Liu said. "But what if I can't get insurance for my parents? Even if they can get insurance [now], there will be a day they won't be able to. "For example, my father has high blood pressure and some other issues. ... I think getting insurance will be a problem." The government requires applicants to hold at least one year of health insurance that covers emergency healthcare (minimum $250,000 a year), medical repatriation, return of remains and cancer treatment (minimum $100,000). Paula Lorgelly says many existing health insurance policies have upper age limits. Photo: Supplied Paula Lorgelly, a professor of health economics at the University of Auckland, said she was unaware of any matching insurance products currently on the market, but she expected providers to start work on delivering them. "Currently a number of insurers have a visiting New Zealand policy to provide cover for a range of travel and medical related claims," Lorgelly said. "These do have considerable exclusions with respect to pre-existing conditions, which means they are somewhat affordable, about $2200 a year [for a couple who are both 60 years old]." Lorgelly said many existing policies had upper age limits of 65 or 75, and they would also include exclusions for pre-existing conditions. "If you have such conditions, which often come with age, then the policy holder will need to pay more to cover them," she said. The $2200 figure was likely to be on the low side of what a new policy would offer, if cancer treatment was included, Lorgelly said. Insurance consultant Amy Tao believed any new insurance products would effectively be like existing travel insurance policies. "It will just be upgraded to include the $100,000 cancer treatment cover, for example," Tao said. She said insurance companies might cover some low-risk pre-existing conditions with extra premiums. "But underwriting is definitely required," she said. "If they think the risk is too high, they may not be able to provide insurance even if you pay more." Her estimation of existing travel insurance policies for an elderly couple was similar to the figure Lorgelly shared, citing $1840 for a couple of 65-year-olds and $2514 for two 70-year-olds, with both policies carrying an excess of $100. Tao said any new product would be more expensive, adding extra cover for cancer and pre-existing conditions. "Insurance is for sure going to cost a bit," she said. "Currently, some insurance companies only allow travel insurance to be purchased for a maximum of one year or two years," she said. "It can be renewed after the expiration date but cannot be purchased directly for five years." Speaking to Morning Report on Monday, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said people needed to hold health insurance for the duration of their stay. "We're striking the balance of making sure that ... these folks who are not taxpayers, haven't contributed to our publicly funded healthcare system, won't be eligible for those services." Immigration minister Erica Stanford Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone Rob Hennin, New Zealand chief executive of health insurance provider NIB, said the company had begun work in line with the government's announcement. "We are already working on a product that aligns with the requirements for this visa, and aim to launch it in September," Hennin said. "While all of the details are yet to be determined, the product would be available to purchase for at least one year to align with government requirements, and cover clients for the entirety of their stay while residing in New Zealand." When asked about the costing, Hennin said it was too soon to say. "We will be working through the product design and details and aim to have this ready by the deadline," he said. Financial Services Council chief executive Kirk Hope said the government had consulted with the industry before the decision was made, and the requirements were reasonable. "I think it's reasonable given what the costs of the taxpayer would be if someone didn't have insurance and had to rely on the taxpayers," Hope said. "So, it's important that people are insured when they're here on visitor visits." Hope said it was important for the types of insurance to be provided by the visitors' home market. Despite the visa's hefty application fee and additional insurance requirements, immigration lawyer Sonny Lam believed the visa would still be popular at face value. "It is not excessively high - flying every six months back and forth is going to cost more than $3000," Lam said. "But the insurance requirement may be harder than it looks," he said. "I had a look at Southern Cross and travel insurance for people over 75 is not so easy." Immigration lawyer Arran Hunt also said the cost of insurance would be "the biggest factor for many". "We expect we'll see more competition in the market, with insurance policies being created to solely meet the criteria of this visa," Hunt said. "The requirements for the visa, as in the pay levels required for sponsors, should mean it is open to almost all couples where both are working," he said. "However, some may struggle to cover the insurance costs, especially for older applicants."
