I respect Karen Chhour.
To overcome the trauma she suffered at the hands the State, and to then become Minister of the very State Department that hurt you is a remarkable journey no matter her politics.
Her voice as a person damaged by that State is powerful and always worth consideration.
I believe that Karen is someone who very much wants the best for the children in State care.
However.
My fear is that she is simply not being given the support she needs to remain as Minister.
Her extraordinarily naive claim that the savage job cuts at Oranga Tamariki won’t impact frontline services is simply not connected to reality and the Minister, despite her good intentions, is parroting glib talking points which bear little resemblance to the grim reality in her underfunded child care infrastructure.
I fear her backstory will be used to ram through bad decisions and she will be left to hang when the inevitable implosions occur.
I think she is also wrong about repealing of the Oranga Tamariki Act…
Lawyers, politicians battle over Waitangi Tribunal’s Oranga Tamariki inquiry
A legal and political battle has erupted over the Waitangi Tribunal’s request to hear Children’s Minister Karen Chhour’s reasoning for removing Treaty provisions from the Oranga Tamariki Act.
In a rare move, the Tribunal has issued a summons to Chhour after she refused to voluntarily answer written or verbal questions.
But Chhour has lawyered up and is now using Crown Law to fight the Tribunal. They have filed papers at the High Court to challenge its power to summons.
And while this legal battle ensues, a war of words has flared up between the three coalition parties
…now.
Did OT egregiously misinterpret Section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act to reverse uplift Māori children from pakeha foster parents?
YES!
Was that an outrageous abuse of power and total misapplication of this section?
Absolutely.
Is there a good reason to ensure newly uplifted Māori children have the option of being placed in culturally appropriate environments?
Of course!
One of the complaints about the uplift process has been a lack of decent research to find appropriate whanau to place the children with, and thanks to the Social Investment model, the focus is removing the kids immediately to save the State money downstream.
The issue is that the Māori providers are being resourced properly to ensure they can provide material well being and security for those children
Karen is caught between two worlds here. The world of knowing what the abuse feels like as a ward of the State and a Political Party whose philosophy is immediate removal over any cultural considerations.
Repealing Section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act could see another lost generation of Māori kids once the imperatives of Social Investment kicks in and immediate uplifts become seen as a means of ruthlessly breaking the cycle.
The Minister needs to be clear about what her agenda is, and that must be children in State care not being abused.
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.
If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media.
Another one who forgets what it is she is there for .We saw the same with Paula Benett when she pulled the ladr up on solo mums who were getting an education the same way as she did when she was a solo gagster mum .This lady needs to stand up and be counted by her fellow STATE CARE kids .
She may think she has come out ok but clearly she has not as she is allowing herself to be used as a political pawn by the racist minority ,who for some reason think they have the right to destroy the lives of Maori children .
Thanks Martyn for a clear common sense explanation of the issue, you can be sure that the usual suspects will pick on some insignificant part of your article & do the mountain out of a molehill trick to deny any progress even though their ideas will be directly against the major requirement of the last sentence in your article.
Martyn – Great insights about Karen’s upbringing…however, I believe its those experiences, and knowledge, which will make her a great Minister for Children in State care…the Waitangi Tribunal has over stepped its madidate again.
Yeah Nathan, you mean just like Louise Upston? How did those life experiences influence her compassion or, seemingly ,empathy?
Wheel – Karen was brought up in State Care…Louise was not.
Yes, neihana and what does her (karens) action say about state care, she is sick in the head.
The Waitangi tribunal has overstepped its mandidate again, yes nathan (you sound like a little kid) and the COCs have given themselves unprecedented power.
She is being used by Seymour because of her background. Her views are not her own. There have been some terrible actions by the state on vulnerable children not least losing one’s cultural identity. Social workers are not completely innocent here they have made some bad decisions however trying to foist pakeha culture and ideology on to Maori is doomed to fail and we will have another lost generation through the juvenile system. Seymour is the catalyst here and Karen Chour is unfortunately the weak link.
Thanks Martyn for clarifying a confusing picture.
you put your finger on the issue.
“Repealing Section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act could see another lost generation of Māori kids once the imperatives of Social Investment kicks in and immediate uplifts become seen as a means of ruthlessly breaking the cycle.”
Karen is a class traitor. Rather like Anker.
Culture has always been an important factor for social workers to consider in their work with children. Some of the horror stories we have heard often relate to cases where the social worker in the case is ‘ordered’ to undertake some course of action they do not agree with – but being a lawful employment instruction they are obligated to follow this instruction. Then the social worker, rather than those requiring a course of action, is held to account for the said action.
Social workers are trained to understand who there client is and about managing boundaries. Most social workers I know are client focussed – and a huge part of this focus is the clients cultural perspective because it is well known that individuals are driven in decisions by a range of factors, of which cultural background plays a crucial role. Any SW at OT who doesn’t consider the importance of culture, especially given the demographics of Ot’s client base, is unlikely to gain much traction with the client or their whanau – both of which are critical to the efficacy of any social work intervention. So, what I am slowly getting to, is that social workers must take the impact of culture on clients absolutely critically – this should not need to be legislated for, but I can understand why this was done.
Now that 7aa is imbedded – it really needs to stay. Remember that the demographic of OT client – there is a very high percentage of Maori clients – over 60% of clients are of Maori descent. At least some of these will be substantively disconnected from their cultural background – one might suggest these clients are colonised in their thinking. So decolonisation of mindsets is critical to assisting Maori ensure they are not minimising the issues they have faced since the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi.
Despite her background as a previous ‘survivor’ of the child protection system (that ended up victimising them further as some of the children placed in their care have been revictimized and at the very least, further traumatised, by the systemic processes), I believe the new minister is erring in considering the removal of this part of the Act – it needs to be there to ensure that this critical aspect of the clients background is part of the journey to recovery for the victim of domestic violence.
How many cases has there been I bet very few to justify tramping on Māori again.
Why not talk about the trauma and life long bad memories caused to children by ‘ uplifting ‘ them ? Why are we not solving the issues before ‘ uplifting ‘ ?
But hey those kids can always ring Mike King AFTER for a maximum of two counselling sessions. ” Nice to meet you. Oh that’s awful wee Jimmy ! Now you tell Mummy or Daddy they have to pay to talk about your problems further. “
It doesn’t pay to underestimate people.
Ms Chhour has more mana then the entire Waitangi Tribunal put together.
The Waitangi Tribunal is NOT a court, and Iwi do not have the right to set legislative programs for our democratically elected governments.
Embedding the Treaty only serves as an anchor for critical race theory. Which is destructive bullshit.
I wish her every success .
The Waitangi Tribunal IS part of NZ’s Judicial System. ” The Employment Court, the Environment Court and the Māori Land Court. The Waitangi Tribunal, Coroners Court and the Courts Martial Appeal Court are all part of the Court system. “
Democratic would imply majority support and as you should know under our electrol system there can be a big difference between majority votes and majority support. While technically it is the fault of those who choose not to participate in elections life is a bit more complicated than that and we actually have a system set up to achieve the ambitions of the rich and powerful under most circumstances.
Blow it out your arse Shona.
Chlour is nothing more than a class traitor that wants to shit all over where she came from, she wants benefits cut, wages cut, and US style healthcare imposed. She can get fucked. And so can you.
Another highly perceptive and constructive comment allowed through by the moderators…
Yes how did your comment get through Ada, or are you really Shona?
That’s a good example of free speech Ada, can’t have it all your own way best not complain
Show me the evidence that Chhour “wants US style health-care imposed”.
She is a member of the party that want to destroy our public universal healthcare system.
She also opposes free prescriptions which is the biggest expansion to the NZ welfare state in 30 years.
I agree but she is selling her soul for political gain at the behest of Seymour. All the evidence is telling her that she is wrong. She would have had much more mana if she stood up to Seymour et.al and refused to do it. Whatever the courts decide she will be forever tarnished by the decision to not engage with the tribunal.
I agree NMG. What it shows is she’s not prepared to sacrifice her lucrative salary over principle.
Mana is earned Shona and sour dour Chour hasn’t done anything to earn mana.
he background is immaterial she’s made comments she can’t/won’t produce evidence for….
THE QUESTION IS ALWAYS CITATION?….
“Her extraordinarily naive claim that the savage job cuts at Oranga Tamariki won’t impact frontline services is simply not connected to reality”
Could it be it is highly connected to her reality.
If you had been abused in State Care via social workers and various policies then your view may be the less social workers on the front line then the less uplifts, the less state care and the less state harm.
Whanau, family, friends, neighbour’s, parishioners, iwi, community will have to step up and step in rather than just make a cyfs call.
Karen is an Act politician, so I think we know what she thinks. And what she does/will do under the Act banner shouldn’t get a pass because she grew up in state care. Her background is like a out of central casting for a Minister of Children but I don’t care about that because so what apart from good on her for overcoming her disadvantagesand ending up a politician making good money. But she’s an adult now and why does she belong to the most rabid right wing party we have ever seen. Not impressed, not at all. So shut up about her hard childhood it means fuck all at this point.
Good point. What could she possibly be thinking to be part of that party? Gives away her agenda somewhat. Part of the neolib mentality that the market will resolve everything yet we know that market dynamics rarely work well in government. Hmmm.