Tuhoe
Service Management Plan
He maimai arohā
Kai te hotu te manawa, kai te tani te nākau, he roimata kanohi, he toto ki te whenua. Moe mai rā e te ranatira Ivan Kwok, moe mai rā, moe mai rā……
Background
Introduction
THE SERVICE MANAGEMENT PLAN
For centuries Tūhoe managed its own affairs. Its kinship institutions were relied upon to deliver peace, justice, truth and prosperity providing a consciousness for a caring and vibrant society. They accepted responsibility for these life happiness essentials born of nature, born of Te Urewera. Colonisation has bought chaos, with some wrongs too great to right, but then there is the opportunity we must not squander to regenerate a vibrant Tūhoe society.
to Review
(SMP) signed in 2012 by Tūhoe and a number of Crown agencies (Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, Ministry of Social Development, Ministry of Education, and three District Health Boards) provided for a review after five years, to cover: · Progress in implementing SMP actions, achieving SMP goals and lifting social outcomes · The health of the relationship between the Crown parties to the SMP and Tūhoe and any improvements needed · New actions and relationship initiatives that need to be undertaken over the next five years · The future role of the Task force including representatives of new parties to the SMP.
THE UNDERLYING QUESTION DRIVING THE REVIEW IS:
Has the settlement delivered on the Crown’s commitment to strengthen Tuhoe maximum autonomy in ending social services dependency?
TŪHOE GOALS FOR THE REVIEW ‘What I’m expecting and guessing that this review would do – would show some depth, rather than be expansive. If we get the right people, we may benefit from an insightful view of an explanation of how things have turned out, how they are, and what could be patterns of what may work over the next 35 years – rather than the tick box thing that we’re trying to avoid.’ – Tāmati Kruger (16 July 2019)
TŪHOE WANTS TO LEARN: · How do we perceive our despair and how do we measure growth in our leadership response to that? · How is Tūhoe grappling with shifting responsibility for social outcomes to Tūhoe? · In terms of the SMP, what does a responsible Crown relationship look like over the next five years? · What do you consider the priorities to be over the next five years? Priorities may reflect a mix of infrastructure, capability or programmes initiatives.
THE CROWN WANTS TO UNDERSTAND:
KŌRERO A TE KARAUNA
· What have agencies done to share responsibility for social service provision? Areas to consider may include: - Authorisation of regional local staff to customise responses with Tūhoe. - Enabling the responsibility for planning, coordinating, managing and designing social service provision to shift to Tūhoe.
‘It is not often in public sector
· What has been the Crown’s involvement over the last 5 years to support the transformation of the social circumstances for Tūhoe communities? · What does the Crown have the potential to do to support the social circumstances for Tūhoe communities in the next 5 years? SMP Review document: https://www.ngaituhoe. iwi.nz/service-management-plan-review
leadership that agencies develop really long-term relationships. And it is not often that we take the time to stop, pause and reflect. The Tūhoe SMP arrangement and its 5-year review clause allows us, indeed requires us, to do just that. The result is a refreshing one. This report records honest reflection. It is realistic, a little uncomfortable, and encouraging. It will help the Crown and Tūhoe make the next steps on our journey, not of dependence or independence, but of interdependence. As we do this, we need a public service that at all levels is capable, engaging and courageous enough to do things differently. This report comes at a time when our collective context has vastly changed through COVID-19. Now, more than ever, we need to rise to the challenges we face together.’ On behalf of the Crown; Debbie Power, Chief Executive, Ministry of Social Development and Lil Anderson, Chief Executive, Office of Māori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti.
THE REVIEWERS MET WITH:
Process of review The review was undertaken by three independent reviewers, Rt Hon Sir Bill English, Professor Ron Paterson and John Whitehead over the period November 2019 to February 2020. The review was undertaken by interviews (kanohi ki te kanohi, with one exception), rather than by analysis of published reports such as Education Review Office reports for schools in the Tūhoe rohe.
· 2-7 December: Chairs, General Managers and delegates from Tūhoe Manawarū Tribal Authority (Ruatāhuna), Te Komiti o Runa Tribal Authority (Rūātoki), Waimana Kaaku Tribal Authority (Waimana) and Waikaremoana Tribal Authority (Waikaremoana); school board trustees and principals; Tūhoe pakeke (from Ruatāhuna and Rūātoki); ranatahi (from Waikaremoana); marae ahi kaa (from Rūātoki); and Tāneatua medical centre staff. · 21-23 January: Tūhoe pakeke (from Ruatāhuna); ranatahi (from Ruatāhuna, Rūātoki and Waikaremoana); Whakatane Police; Bay of Plenty District Health Board; Lakes District Health Board and Hawke’s Bay District Health Board. · 30 January: Ministry of Social Development and Ministry of Education · 11-13 February: Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment; Oranga Tamariki; New Zealand Police; Ministry of Health; and Ministry of Housing and Urban Development. In the time available, the reviewers were not able to meet with mayors, local councillors or ministers, or with Tūhoe living outside the rohe.
What we heard from Tuhoe
Tūhoe seldom talked about despair. There were some exceptions. “60 kids coming for breakfast at Tāneatua School. We are a symptom of burnt out houses, violence and drug abuse. Kids carry this on their shoulders. Teachers are abused. High proportion of despair in the kids.” (Board of Trustee chairs). P is a new, huge problem in the community (Ruātahuna pakeke). They described being Tūhoe and achieving mana motuhake, but with realism, a mix of aspiration and understanding that there is a process of getting from here to there. Underlying support for mana motuhake and the 40 year journey. While there was some tension and negativity, overwhelmingly, they expressed support for the 40-year vision and their leadership. People talked about hope, for example: “There is hope in Ruatāhuna now, there is a future for us.” (Ruatāhuna delegate). Some people said the new buildings (at Tāneatua, Ruātahuna and Lake Waikaremoana) had uplifted them. “After two years of talking, we saw the idea behind developing the central place for us – even though we really wanted to fix our marae.” (Ruatāhuna delegate).
Ranatahi expressed hope for their future. They were excited about economic development, hauora and managing their own natural resources. There was an attitude that it was up to them. They had a sense of ownership and were determined to do what they need for themselves – a visible reflection of mana motuhake. In Education, people talked about Te Urewera as the classroom, but expressed frustration at the constraints of the standard curriculum. Progress was achieved in two schools where parents were mobilised to stand and were elected to boards of trustees. In Health, people said that SMP was supposed to make it easier to deal with multiple District Health Boards (DHBs) but that there’s been no real change in those relationships. Isolation for remote, rural communities remains a problem. But there have been some successes – bringing mobile dental services for high school students to Ruātahuna, and a Health Protection Officer working with local communities to improve household drinking water. A new Tūhoe medical centre has been established in Tāneatua.
In Housing, progress has been patchy. Repairs to some houses in Ruatāhuna was cited as a success story – this was a pilot focused on families with physical health at risk. A survey of families who were part of the pilot found it had improved their outlook on life. Substandard housing, and a shortage of houses, are barriers to more Tūhoe people moving back home, and to attracting skilled professionals like teachers and nurses. In Justice and Police, the Mending Room is cited as an excellent initiative, meeting the needs of whānau, hapū and iwi, and Crown agencies. Increasingly, there is evidence of friendly relationships with Police, although some remain wary. Relationships with Crown officials who put in time and came to the rohe were praised, especially when backed by head office. Recent examples included Paul Jones from MBIE on housing issues, Melissa Pye from Oranga Tamariki, Stu Nightingale from Police and Damian Edwards from the Ministry of Education. Some people complained about poor communication from TUT and being sidelined. “We are on the sidelines. … The mana lies, or should lie, in the marae, not the corporate structure.” (Waimana delegates). They recognised their leadership as inspirational, but said “Take us with you.”
There was some lack of clarity about TUT governance – is it really the Tribal chairs (as is claimed), or the TUT Board? Who should have the right to engage with the Crown? Does it have to go through TUT? If the Crown is offering, why should we ‘shoot ourselves in the foot’ and not take it? Why can’t I just talk to the General Manager for the lake? Some people expressed frustration that the Crown has not ‘gone the extra mile’ and the ‘substantial’ progress aspired for in the SMP has not been achieved. “We need to push the government’s car out of the garage.” (Ruatāhuna kaumatua) Tūhoe leadership seeks people of heart who will help them and work with them, growing trust and transcending differences. There needs to be an emotional connection, but those connections must become embedded in Crown agencies. Tūhoe leadership is not really interested in meeting with groups of officials in Wellington, but does want a pragmatic mechanism to make things happen at the Crown end. The original Taskforce seems to have dropped out of the picture. Tūhoe leadership is keen to secure Crown capacity and commitment going into the next five years – to deepen the relationship with the Crown and focus on some specific outcomes.
What we heard from the Crown
Universal admiration for Tūhoe leadership and the vision of mana motuhake
‘Tūhoe need to build some capacity at governance level’ (CE).
Recognition that Tūhoe are different and challenging – but innovative, potentially providing lessons pointing the way for other Iwi-Crown post-settlement relationships.
Recognition from DHBs that the Health goals of SMP have not been realised and relationships can be stronger. The DHBs pointed to some successes, while recognising the need to do more. Bay of Plenty DHB noted its work to support Tūhoe in the set-up of their primary care services and clinics. Other reported examples were the high number of kaupapa Māori providers (including Tūhoe Hauora) in the eastern Bay of Plenty (without recognition that they are not seen by Tūhoe as Tūhoe providers), and improved household drinking water from the efforts of a Health Protection Officer working with local communities. There was recognition from all three DHBs of the need for more engagement with Tūhoe.
Acknowledgment that Tūhoe have a remarkable capacity to forgive. Recognition of the unique nature of the Tūhoe settlement and that the relationship needs to be 85% Tūhoe, 15% Crown – but with a desire for Tūhoe to articulate what success looks like. Tūhoe has a 40-year vision, whereas the Crown is often looking at one to three years due to political cycles. Readiness and willingness to be told what to do – letting Tūhoe develop their own strategies, eg Matemateāone (Oranga Tamariki). Agencies see that if they put effort in with Tūhoe, there are results. It’s not a time-wasting relationship. There is enthusiasm for working with Tūhoe, and admiration. Not a lot of confidence in the coordinating mechanism of officials. The lead coordination role of MSD may no longer be sensible or sustainable. ‘Honour from the Crown does not mean always talking to the top dog’ (CE)
Housing is still in the process of a shift, with the establishment of a new Crown agency. The Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) acknowledged that it was in its infant stages and hasn’t engaged or stepped up to the plate yet, but recognises the need to do so. Crown agencies spoke about facing problems with trying to engage with multiple Iwi post-settlement. They raised questions about sustainability, with the Tūhoe settlement being one of 70: “How can we keep all the balls in air?” with over 10,000 Treaty settlement commitments so far. There was some recognition that the Crown itself is struggling.
What we think 1. Tūhoe are further ahead than they give themselves credit for. 2. The clarity of Tūhoe leadership’s 40-year vision is impressive. There is no loss of sight of the long-term goals. Tūhoe have sorted their vision more quickly than some other Iwi. 3. We are impressed by the leadership in Tūhoe – General Managers, Chairs, ranatahi. TUT itself works, despite some lack of clarity about governance arrangements. Coming from the outside, the people look aligned, and there is quality leadership.
4. There are some tensions internally and in the relationship with the Crown as everyone gets used to a different type of relationship. Tensions are to be expected only five years into a new set up. Community collective governance is hard. Tensions are the result of grappling with new processes for governance and control – but people are committed to dealing with it. In our view, such tensions can be used constructively. 5. Relationships work best when people are frank about what they can/can’t do. This is part of honour on the part of the Crown. Saying stuff ‘you have to say’ undermines honour. In many respects, the Tūhoe-Crown relationship is healthy. Not all the relationships with individual agencies, however, meet the standard of frankness and honesty. 6. Tūhoe talked about honour on the part of the Crown and establishing the relationship. The Crown didn’t use the word honour but did talk of respect – “you show respect when you turn up, follow through and keep your word”. 7. Tūhoe are seeking further deepening of the relationship with the Crown – for it not to be dependent only on the good will of a few individuals from Crown agencies.
8. A few individuals in the Crown (Ivan Kwok ex-Treasury, Paul Jones MBIE, Wally Haumaha, Police) have thought about the relationship with Tūhoe in a deep way. Ivan Kwok points to a more humble Crown that devolves decision making to iwi – away from Wellington and closer to where problems and solutions are. Delegating, partnering and taking risks is difficult for those used to being in control. It remains to be seen whether public servants can learn to partner and delegate, and avoid their risk aversion and over-specifying what others must do. 9. A relationship ultimately reflects what it does. Crown individuals observed that there’s lots of talking, building ‘relationship capital’, but there may be too much? In our view, a precondition to success, on both sides, is to listen to people, prepare an agreed list and then do it. 10. We think that a critically important ingredient is the presence of an ‘authorising environment’ (backing from the top of Crown agency) plus staff on the ground who are committed, push the boundaries, and make it happen. A good example is Matemateāone (the high level Tūhoe – Oranga Tamariki agreement), which is being followed up by an Action Plan 2019-20 developed by local staff, covering specifics (eg, Tūhoetana caregiver and home assessment standards designed by Tūhoe).
11. For Crown CEs, engaging with Māori and achieving gains for Māori is a key part of their job description. It’s the hard part of what they’re meant to do. They should have a good grip of this. The drive needs to come from the top. Dealing with ‘Māori stuff’, however, is often delegated to Māori staff. This results in uneven performance from Crown entities dealing with Tūhoe. 12. The Crown is learning new relationship skills from Tūhoe that it can translate to other Crown relationships. Paul Jones notes that the SMP requires the Crown to relate on a human (not a bureaucratic or transactional) level and to know the history of the Crown-Tūhoe relationship. For example, this behaviour is exhibited by some key individuals in Police. 13. The SMP was probably unrealistic in expecting ‘substantial’ progress in targeted areas in five years. We don’t have the measures to assess the extent of progress – there has been some, but we doubt it has been ‘substantial’. There is evidence of innovation and experimentation in some of the SMP areas, creating models for wider application beyond Tūhoe. 14. Some bad things, such as complete reliance on the Crown for responding to Tūhoe’s social problems, have been averted – and there is some evidence of growing interdependence.
15. In Health, there is little evidence of progress, despite expressed willingness to engage and evidence of flexibility in applying DHB boundaries. Despite well informed DHB Māori health gains managers, there is not a lot of evidence of Tūhoe health gains being achieved or clarity about Tūhoe health priorities. The reason may be a lack of Tūhoe specific data – iwi affiliations are not always identified in the data. DHBs don’t think of Tūhoe as a discrete community, because people are not designated as Tūhoe. Based on available Māori statistics, and discussion with Tūhoe communities, it should be possible to identify a few key health targets for improvement. 16. Tūhoe are good at doing stuff they can grab onto. In areas where Tūhoe have articulated specific needs (teenage dental services in Ruatāhuna, household water quality, coordinator for bookings from Lake Waikaremoana), Health officials have been responsive. The new Tūhoe medical centre, with enrolled patients, is an accomplishment – evidence of Tūhoe charting their own course in health.
Some thoughts about what needs to happen 1. Over the next five years, the Tūhoe-Crown relationship needs to deepen and focus on some tangible outcomes. It is time for less talk about the relationship and more action on specifics. The SMP lays the foundations but implementation so far has been light on specifics. Further development of specific goals by Tūhoe would help the Crown. For example, starting from the goal of no children going to Oranga Tamariki in five years leads to different outcomes from relying just on an open conversation about the relationship. What do Tūhoe and the Crown want to see in 5 years for each area? This may be particularly difficult in Health, given current health system structures. But it should be possible to make measurable progress on a few specific target areas (eg, avoidable admissions to hospital for common conditions; reducing impact of P, other drugs and alcohol in the community).
2. Crown capacity is an important issue for the next 5 years. Organisations need to nurture the relationship with Tūhoe, so it doesn’t drop off and disappear when the individual driving it moves on. Agencies need to pay attention to the authorising environment and the individual or group on the ground to push it. It is the responsibility of the Chief Executive to identify staff who can deal with the obligation to Tūhoe and lead the particular relationship. This is part of the honour of the Crown. The Crown needs to find, teach and nurture individuals of good will who are highly motivated, can think laterally and see opportunities to use the rules to achieve rather than frustrate the goals. The Crown should provide ‘cover’ from the top for these individuals. 3. Hard questions will continue to be explored over the next five years. For example, what is the balance between mana motuhake and ‘receiving entitlements as New Zealand citizens’ and how should this evolve? How can the principles in the SMP (good faith, integrity, honesty, transparency and accountability) be put into practice to support a more permissive interpretation of relevant statutes, which some Crown officials read in a narrow, legalistic way?
4. More and more meetings are not the way forward. The Taskforce has passed its use-by date as a coordinating mechanism. However, Tūhoe need a practical means of gathering key Crown parties to the SMP around the table, when necessary, and to forge an evolving view of the next steps in enabling Tūhoe autonomy. 5. The SMP should be renewed, with a new name reflecting Tūhoetana, and the parties asked to reaffirm commitments (with some new players, for example Ministry of Housing & Urban Development). 6. In Health, the Director-General of Health should be a signatory to the renewed SMP, as well as the three DHBs, and the role of Bay of Plenty DHB in leading the three DHBs (in progressing SMP Health-related commitments) should be reinforced. In Housing, the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (whose express purpose of ‘he kāina ora, he hapori ora’ echoes the Tūhoe vision) should also be a signatory to the renewed SMP. We believe a commitment from central agencies is important to ensuring things will change.
Concluding
Comments
It has been a privilege to undertake this review. We record our thanks to all the people, from Tūhoe and the Crown, who were generous with their time and willing to speak so frankly to us. We are grateful for the manaakitana shown to us as we travelled across the Tūhoe rohe. We acknowledge the assistance of the note takers and advisors who accompanied us: Meredith Paterson, Eleonora De Crescenzo, Hera Clarke and Manaia King.
The Tūhoe Deed of Settlement, signed in 2014, was a bold and visionary step towards resolving grievances and establishing a new relationship between Tūhoe and the Crown. The SMP is at the heart of the Te Mana Motuhake redress, envisaging a long-term relationship to progressively transform the social circumstances of the people of Ngāi Tūhoe. After five years, we see encouraging signs of progress and good reason to continue on the 40-year journey. John Whitehead
Professor Ron Paterson
Rt Hon Sir Bill English