Latest news with #SonjaCooper
RNZ News
9 hours ago
- Politics
- RNZ News
Abuse in care survivors in line for under a third of government's $774m package
Photo: 123RF Less than a third of the government's $774 million abuse in care redress package will end up in the pockets of survivors . Figures obtained by RNZ revealed only $205m was earmarked for paying new claims with $52m to go towards topping up previously closed claims. In defence of the figures, Erica Stanford, the Minister leading the government's abuse in care response, said redress payments were not the most important thing for some survivors and some of the $774m in this year's Budget was going towards changing the care system and providing other supports. However, $92m was for the civil servants who administered the redress funds and another $37m would pay for operating costs like premises and IT. For every two dollars going to survivors, more than a dollar would be spent on administration. Cooper Legal principal partner Sonja Cooper, whose firm had acted for hundreds of abuse survivors and victims, said it was a disgrace. Sonja Cooper Photo: RNZ / Aaron Smale "We were really disappointed with the announcement in any event," Cooper said. "I think now when you break it down, it actually just gets worse. The more information that is received, the more cynical and disappointing what's been offered to survivors is. "I've been reflecting on this because obviously we've seen what other Commonwealth countries have done. We've seen what Australia has done, we've seen what Canada has done, we've seen what Ireland has done and we really are letting everyone down. This must be the worst redress scheme put in place by a government for survivors of abuse in care across the Commonwealth. "I just think that's a disgrace. New Zealand has no excuse for that." The Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care had called for a new, independent and survivor-centric redress system. In announcing the $774m Budget package last month, the government also quashed any hope of establishing a new system, saying it would be costly and cause delays . But Cooper said the revelation so much of the government's package would be spent on administration had demonstrated why government officials should not have been trusted with the redress system in the first place. Officials were "taking so much away from the pockets of survivors, who deserve better than this", she said. "It's again, the system looking after itself. It's again, the system taking for itself and giving as little as it can to survivors, while the government continues to crow and pat itself on the back. "This is not a success. This is a failure, and it is a failure in so many ways. All of those who've been advocating for survivors, I've been doing it for 30 years now, I feel like we are back at the start. "This is not going to make survivors go away. It is a temporary fix and all I can hope is that at some stage we have another government that will actually do the right thing for survivors, because this is not." The Royal Commission investigated the cost of abuse in care and estimated it totalled between $96 billion and $217 billion - the vast majority of that was borne by survivors. The government's $289m of funding for financial redress and targeted supported represented just over 1.5 cents for every dollar of harm borne by survivors. In May following the announcement, Stanford called the $774m an investment into redress. "The announcement on Friday was significant," she told the House. "Let's start with that. More than three-quarters of a billion dollars - $774 million, as a pre-budget announcement; the single largest investment into redress in this country's history." Erica Stanford Photo: RNZ / Marika Khabazi Stanford was not available for an interview on Tuesday, but in a statement emphasised the funding was not only about redress. "To be clear, the $774 million investment in Budget 2025 was made to improve the redress system and [emphasis added by the Minister's office] improving the safety of children and vulnerable adults in care today. Many survivors have shared that their highest priority is for the system to change so what happened to them is prevented in the future," the statement said. "This includes important investments in initiatives like improving care workforce capability, improvements to safeguarding to reduce abuse and harm to children and young people in care, upgrades to mental health units to improve safety and dignity, more funding for oversight of compulsory mental health and addiction care, funding through the social investment model to fund effective initiatives that prevent entry into care, and upgrading systems to triage and respond to complaints. "It's important to note, that redress is about more than just monetary payments. The $485.5 million redress investment encompasses not only payments, but targeted supports, accessing records, being listened to and apologised to, funding for legal representation, and implementing improvements so that survivors have access to equitable redress regardless of which agency is administering it. That is what survivors have told us is important to them. While there are survivors who may be only interested in receiving financial redress, there are many others for who other aspects are just as important to them as a payment, if not more." The changes announced in this year's Budget would result in the average abuse in care claim payment rising from about $20,000 to about $30,000 - just over one month's salary for Minister Stanford. Keith Wiffin, a survivor who entered state care at 10 years old and sat on the Redress Design Group which provided a report to the government in late 2023, said survivors were grateful for the redress they received but it fell short of the promises the government had made. "Once again it's just not the investment required to bring about resolution and solution," he said. "Obviously, a lot of that money is not going to where it was originally indicated it would go to. It's just not going to bring about resolution - the investment required is more than that. "And I don't want to seem ungrateful because it's taxpayers' money and I am grateful for anything they put in. But it's just a small top up to an existing system which has fundamentally failed in the past." He was also outraged by how much of the funding would be spent on administration of redress. "It just highlights how unjust the whole thing is and how much how much of a misleading presentation by Erica Stanford and co, when they've clearly indicated that that money is to go to survivors," Wiffin said. "It's always the case with state sector redress programmes. There's so much of it gets sucked up by administration costs and various other associated costs and it's just another unjust thing for survivors to have to carry." Wiffin was also still waiting for an explanation as to why the recommendations of the Royal Commission of Inquiry were dismissed, he said. "It was fairly blunt in terms of dismissing the independent process, just dismissing it," Wiffin said. "I've had no reason why they have done that and I think we are owed that. So that it feels very disrespectful not to offer that explanation. Others may have had some indication, but certainly I haven't."
RNZ News
16 hours ago
- Politics
- RNZ News
Abuse in care survivors in line for under a third of government's $774 package
Photo: 123RF Less than a third of the government's $774 million abuse in care redress package will end up in the pockets of survivors . Figures obtained by RNZ revealed only $205m was earmarked for paying new claims with $52m to go towards topping up previously closed claims. In defence of the figures, Erica Stanford, the Minister leading the government's abuse in care response, said redress payments were not the most important thing for some survivors and some of the $774m in this year's Budget was going towards changing the care system and providing other supports. However, $92m was for the civil servants who administered the redress funds and another $37m would pay for operating costs like premises and IT. For every two dollars going to survivors, more than a dollar would be spent on administration. Cooper Legal principal partner Sonja Cooper, whose firm had acted for hundreds of abuse survivors and victims, said it was a disgrace. LE] Sonja Cooper Photo: RNZ / Aaron Smale "We were really disappointed with the announcement in any event," Cooper said. "I think now when you break it down, it actually just gets worse. The more information that is received, the more cynical and disappointing what's been offered to survivors is. "I've been reflecting on this because obviously we've seen what other Commonwealth countries have done. We've seen what Australia has done, we've seen what Canada has done, we've seen what Ireland has done and we really are letting everyone down. This must be the worst redress scheme put in place by a government for survivors of abuse in care across the Commonwealth. "I just think that's a disgrace. New Zealand has no excuse for that." The Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care had called for a new, independent and survivor-centric redress system. In announcing the $774m Budget package last month, the government also quashed any hope of establishing a new system, saying it would be costly and cause delays . But Cooper said the revelation so much of the government's package would be spent on administration had demonstrated why government officials should not have been trusted with the redress system in the first place. Officials were "taking so much away from the pockets of survivors, who deserve better than this", she said. "It's again, the system looking after itself. It's again, the system taking for itself and giving as little as it can to survivors, while the government continues to crow and pat itself on the back. "This is not a success. This is a failure, and it is a failure in so many ways. All of those who've been advocating for survivors, I've been doing it for 30 years now, I feel like we are back at the start. "This is not going to make survivors go away. It is a temporary fix and all I can hope is that at some stage we have another government that will actually do the right thing for survivors, because this is not." The Royal Commission investigated the cost of abuse in care and estimated it totalled between $96 billion and $217 billion - the vast majority of that was borne by survivors. The government's $289m of funding for financial redress and targeted supported represented just over 1.5 cents for every dollar of harm borne by survivors. In May following the announcement, Stanford called the $774m an investment into redress. "The announcement on Friday was significant," she told the House. "Let's start with that. More than three-quarters of a billion dollars - $774 million, as a pre-budget announcement; the single largest investment into redress in this country's history." Erica Stanford Photo: RNZ / Marika Khabazi Stanford was not available for an interview on Tuesday, but in a statement emphasised the funding was not only about redress. "To be clear, the $774 million investment in Budget 2025 was made to improve the redress system and [emphasis added by the Minister's office] improving the safety of children and vulnerable adults in care today. Many survivors have shared that their highest priority is for the system to change so what happened to them is prevented in the future," the statement said. "This includes important investments in initiatives like improving care workforce capability, improvements to safeguarding to reduce abuse and harm to children and young people in care, upgrades to mental health units to improve safety and dignity, more funding for oversight of compulsory mental health and addiction care, funding through the social investment model to fund effective initiatives that prevent entry into care, and upgrading systems to triage and respond to complaints. "It's important to note, that redress is about more than just monetary payments. The $485.5 million redress investment encompasses not only payments, but targeted supports, accessing records, being listened to and apologised to, funding for legal representation, and implementing improvements so that survivors have access to equitable redress regardless of which agency is administering it. That is what survivors have told us is important to them. While there are survivors who may be only interested in receiving financial redress, there are many others for who other aspects are just as important to them as a payment, if not more." The changes announced in this year's Budget would result in the average abuse in care claim payment rising from about $20,000 to about $30,000 - just over one month's salary for Minister Stanford. Keith Wiffin, a survivor who entered state care at 10 years old and sat on the Redress Design Group which provided a report to the government in late 2023, said survivors were grateful for the redress they received but it fell short of the promises the government had made. "Once again it's just not the investment required to bring about resolution and solution," he said. "Obviously, a lot of that money is not going to where it was originally indicated it would go to. It's just not going to bring about resolution - the investment required is more than that. "And I don't want to seem ungrateful because it's taxpayers' money and I am grateful for anything they put in. But it's just a small top up to an existing system which has fundamentally failed in the past." He was also outraged by how much of the funding would be spent on administration of redress. "It just highlights how unjust the whole thing is and how much how much of a misleading presentation by Erica Stanford and co, when they've clearly indicated that that money is to go to survivors," Wiffin said. "It's always the case with state sector redress programmes. There's so much of it gets sucked up by administration costs and various other associated costs and it's just another unjust thing for survivors to have to carry." Wiffin was also still waiting for an explanation as to why the recommendations of the Royal Commission of Inquiry were dismissed, he said. "It was fairly blunt in terms of dismissing the independent process, just dismissing it," Wiffin said. "I've had no reason why they have done that and I think we are owed that. So that it feels very disrespectful not to offer that explanation. Others may have had some indication, but certainly I haven't."
