MEDIAWATCH: Mike Hosking grills Luxon over physically hurting children in Boot Camps
The issue is that enabling the use of force raises the possibility that this power will be abused. It has been in the past, quite horrifically, and in ways Luxon has acknowledged, and will apologise for next week regarding the abuse of those in state care.
This is specifically pointed out in the leaked document in the Herald story, which said using force “may be viewed as increasing the potential risk of abuse in custody, particularly in light of historic[al] abuse experienced by children and young people in similar programmes reported in the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care report”.
“Providing these powers outside of residences, and to staff and providers, means impacting on the rights of young people, and may result in harm to young people. It is for these reasons that the extension of use of force powers would be limited only to physical restraints / physical holds so as to lessen the potential impact and harms on a young person.”
Not that Luxon seemed aware of any this when Hosking asked the Prime Minister about the Herald story. “We’re not playing this dumb game,” Hosking said when Luxon told him he couldn’t comment.
Hosking: “You’re setting the rules and the rules of engagement. Do you give the providers the power to use force or not?”
Luxon: “I haven’t had those conversations. I haven’t been briefed on that.”
Hosking: “Sorry, with who? What do you mean? Conversations with who? Who are you talking to or not talking to, as the case may be?
Luxon: “Well, I mean, it hasn’t been a topic of conversation that we’ve had with, you know, [Minister for Children] Karen Chhour and myself.”
When Luxon didn’t seem aware of the justification for using force, Hosking read it out to him: “Not providing these powers would mean staff outside of the residential setting would be exposed to legal risk if they try to prevent a young person from absconding or from harming themselves or harming another person. Given this risk, I [the minister] consider that clear authority is needed.”
Then followed the question that led to Luxon digging himself a hole. Hosking: “As a concept, then, given you haven’t had discussions, does that sit comfortably with you?”
Luxon: “No. I want to make sure that there is multiple, you know, approaches around oversight and protection of those young people. And so that’s where I’d be coming down in that conversation, when we get to have that conversation.”
He then clarified he meant multiple oversight in the ability “not to use force”, and that there needs to be a “culture shift” towards “child safeguarding”.
Children and young people advocates will rejoice in this surprising announcement that the use of force will be prohibited.
The problem is that the conversation Luxon says hasn’t happened has, in fact, already been had. Cabinet, which Luxon chairs, has signed off the use of force.
Of course a lot of papers and details and policies come to Cabinet and across the Prime Minister’s desk, and it would be fanciful to think he would retain detailed knowledge about all of them.
But when there’s a story in Herald this morning related to the historic abuse Luxon will soon be apologising for, then Luxon should be across it in preparation for his Tuesday morning media rounds, or at least he should be informed about it by his staff or relevant ministers.
That seems to have happened immediately afterwards. Talking to media at 10am on his way to caucus, Luxon was singing a very different tune.
Yes, Cabinet had signed off the use of force, but it’s a “broad paper”, and what he meant was he “hadn’t had an explicit conversation with Karen Chhour about that particular issue”.
Is he not across everything Cabinet has agreed to? “I’m pretty much across everything. I’m just saying to you, I didn’t have a detailed conversation about how it is operationally applied.”
And by the way, he’s okay with using force “as a last resort … under very strict guidelines”.
No one tunes into ZB for a critique of the National Party, so imagine everyone’s universal shock when Mike Hosking turned on the Prime Minister yesterday morning during his weekly ZB cuddle!
The leak about the use of force on young offenders in future boot camps was the issue and despite Cabinet signing off on the legal use of force against children in the military boot camps that won’t work, Luxon was grilled by Hosking over why the Government was legalising the use of physical force against children in State care because, you know, that whole abuse in state care inquiry we just had.
Luxon stumbled and flailed around as he attempted to explain why the state gaining legal protections from physically harming children in state care was any different to what the state had been forced to apologise to all those who had been abused in state care.
Remember, the military boot camps are a $5million dollar virtue signal that has no supporting evidence of working. The only reason National are embarking upon this is because they know their reactionary, angry, redneck supporters love the idea of military boot camps, no matter the damage, but when even Mike Hosking doesn’t believe Luxon, surely this Government has crossed a red line.
Sure, leave Mongrel Mob kids alone in the back of a squad car for hours on end and use heavy handed strip searches against Māori in Opotiki, but anger Mike Hosking and the entire right wing Government must scramble to pacify one rich white guy.
National have legalised the use of physical force against children in the same year that this every same rules led to hundreds of thousands of abused children in state care and the whole of NZ seems to be fine with that.
What. The. Fuck. Have. We. Become?
Luxon clearly is not up to the job and is digging another hole on the daily basis .He needs to act and reign in these crock of shit ministers he has hired to fuck people over .Chour and costello are just plain fucken idiots that need to go back to the swamp .
Parents can’t physically discipline their children but the government can assault them? Interesting
Have they actually though? Cabinet can’t change that part of the law. s41 of the Crimes Act allows any person the use of reasonable force in preventing suicide, and s48 the usual self-defence in prevention of injury to yourself or another.
What it seems is that Cabinet has just given the nod to those running the boot camps that they can use those powers they already had and remain employed.
SUPERVISOR: Due to circumstances in the Bootcamp, we may have to use force, do you understand?
CHILD: But what does Luxon say?
SUPERVISOR: He says we can use force that’s no greater than reasonably necessary. He also thinks Bootcamps are a fantastic experience and really impressive, an inspiring powerful intervention in young people’s lives, and the care, love, and support he saw when he visited was phenomenal, though he did triple his security detail, and remained within his vehicle.
CHILD: What kind of force is reasonable?
SUPERVISOR: Some of the information about it in the public domain is redacted due to legal privilege, but I can assure you that oversight from Children’s Commission official Mr Saville and Oranga Tamariki official Mr Cosby is of the highest caliber. So tell me, what would you say’s more appropriate, paralyzing drugs or ECT?
CHILD: Are you sure Luxon’s ok with all this?
SUPERVISOR: He hasn’t had the conversation or been briefed about it. But that’s where he will be coming down in the conversation, when he has the conversation, that he says he’s yet to have, though he’s actually already had it, possibly while in Te Puke. He wasn’t explicit about the issue, but has signed off on it in the broader sense. Is that all clear?
CHILD: Well it seems I’m at risk of harm, while in care, that the state put me into.
SUPERVISOR: Yes, and Luxon will be apologizing for it next week.
CHILD: So let me ask you this? If I am at risk of harm, or being harmed from one of the adult staff, you know like physical agression or sexual abuse as was common ‘ in state care ‘ , was it signed off by Luxon that I can use force to protect myself ?
SUPERVISOR: Aah..one moment. I will just check the SOP manual on that. Ummm ..NO . There is no clause here to allow you to do that?
CHILD: So I have no RIGHTS to consent to this bootcamp or protect myself ?
SUPERVISOR: Doesn’t appear so in any paperwork. The kid that opted out earlier on was a hiccup so Luxon is signing off on another change to make it mandatory to stay.
But hey kid… you’ll get an apology in maybe ten/ twenty years.
CHILD: So does section 48 of the Crimes Act 1961 which says “Every one is justified in using, in the defence of himself or herself or another, such force as, in the circumstances as he or she believes them to be, it is reasonable to use,” not apply to us young people here in boot camp even though it starts with the two words – “Every one”?
SUPERVISOR: Ahhh, hang on…..just checking. I will just call Mr Luxon and Ms Chhour (pause)…No, section 48 does not apply to you young people because you are here to be punished and have forced used on you which is the only way to make you good citizens.
If you have to use force you should not be in that kind of role /job. Using force reinforces violence better to have other means to deal with these teenagers’ outburst.
With the amount of holes cluxon keeps digging perhaps he has a future as a fencing contractor. Or, perhaps not, he’s going to get very sore lips digging them the way he does
He’d get too many splinters licking the fence posts
Get one thing straight–“Mi–Cockskin” does not give one about whether vulnerable damaged kids get yet another kicking while being detained by the state.
My pick is that Baldrick’s incompetence is disturbing some of the Natzo higher ups to the point they would like him replaced, so Mike dutifully tries to trip him up, embarrass him, and expose his lack of political ability to aid that process.
Tiger Mountain. Good point, that Hosking is acting as instructed. Key apparently choosing a weakling like Luxon as National’s leader has been a bit of a conundrum and it could be backfiring on them now; Biden did the same thing with Harris, and look how that’s panned out.
Yep, this adds up.
It’s illegal to use force to discipline ones own children but OK for the State do do so.
I think I just saw a pig fly past my window.
It’s illegal to use force to discipline ones own children but OK for the State do do so.
c’mon – it’s an indoctrination camp – what do you expect? tiddlywinks? lock the fuckers up listening to the lords prayer until they are mentally at the level of a Romanian orphan, send them round to burn down Karen Chours house, place a few pipe bombs to detonate when the fire brigade turns up and then take the fire engine on a ram raid mission through a mall. all rehabilitated.
100% correct thats the future of NZ under the current corrections management policy og this government.
The pig that flew past? Was his name luxon?