Headline: Funding for sexual services too little too late
Today’s announcement of $10.4 million over two years to plug the funding shortfall for sexual violence services is too little, too late, says Labour’s Social Development spokesperson Sue Moroney.
“In April, Rape Prevention Education co-ordinator Kim McGregor told the select committee that the sector needed $10m right now just to keep going.
“The Government has responded by delivering $ 10.4 million over the next two years , after having ignored the plight of the sector which has faced an increased demand for services with less funding.
“National also ignored the 71 recommendations delivered to it by the Taskforce for Action on Sexual Violence in 2009. This taskforce was set-up by Labour in 2007, but it’s work was shelved by National who ignored its report and recommendations.
“Labour is working on a comprehensive and long term package aimed at making New Zealand a world leader in reducing sexual offending” , says Labour’s Women’s Affairs spokesperson Carol Beaumont..
“There are however changes that can, and should, be made immediately. These measures are backed by hard evidence and are well overdue. They include changes to policing, the operation of the justice system and focussing on preventing sexual violence. The inquiry being undertaken by the Social Services Select Committee needs to be prioritised to deliver adequate and sustainable funding for sexual violence support services.
“National has responded by doing the least it thinks it can get away with. It’s better than doing nothing, but it won’t make up for the 5 years of neglect and inaction.”
—
Opinion and belief:
On the 4th October 2013 written submissions closed for the Select Committess investigation into “Funding of Sexual Abuse Social Services Inquiry”.
GREENS submission_guide_-_funding_of_sexual_abuse_social_services
I have given written submissions, requesting the opportunity to give oral submissions too.
When I rang the Select Committee office at the beginning of this year to find out when I can expect to give oral subs to the committee, the girl at the end of the phone told me that, as this is an election year, they will be saving it for a while, and they will contact me about my oral subs date. I have this date now, and the Select Committee have begun hearing oral subs now.
When the call ended, I felt as if National were planning to use this rape funding issue as an election points gathering earner. I may be wrong, but I know what I was told by the girl on the end of the phone.
Anyway, the funding issue is now under investigation. This however does not mean that it will be fixed.
ACC fund sexually violent crime – that sounds odd doesn’t it – but they do.
ACC decide in the first place, whether to accept your claim for assistance as a direct result of rape. They decide whether to say “yes” we will help you, or “no” we won’t help you.
Then they decide (if they accept that you are indeed a victim and survivor of sexually violent crime), how many sessions of counselling you are allowed to have.
When the initial number of counselling sessions are used up, it is up to your counsellor to request more sessions for you, if the counsellor decides you need further and on-going assistance.
The counsellor requests these further sessions through ACC. Now this is where it all falls over. Well definitely where it has all fallen over in the past.
The ACC employee (the victim/survivors ACC case manager at the Sensitive Claims Unit), now decides whether to let you have more sessions or not. The response is generally “No”. So the victim of rape is now left unaided.
I believe, because of the callousness of the ACC SCU, and the way they make the rape victim, and their counsellor, have to fight for every minute of counselling assistance, that the ACC should have this part of their operation removed from their care (excuse me, that should more appropriately be lack of care!).
It would be a really good idea, and most helpful to the victim of rape, if they could have all this helpful kind of stuff like counselling, administered by a different body of people. A body of people like the ones already in existence eg Wellington Rape Crisis, and for ACC to just pay the bills for the counselling.
Why?
ACC SCU continually cause more abuse to, and re-traumatise the victim of rape. They don’t appear to care about the person at all.
The ACC SCU only care about the number of dollars spent on this person or that person – so let them have the dollars responsibility.
The eg Wellington Rape Crisis care about the person, the victim, of the rape, and are very good at this caring – so let them have the caring responsibility.
The WRC know what the victim and survivor needs.
The ACC SCU doesn’t care what the victim survivor needs.
It would be a big mistake for ACC SCU, or ACC to continue to have control over these victims of sexually violent crime. The control must be given to the rape crisis centers that already exist.
I know all this from first hand experience.
Definitely too little too late!
Comments are closed.