Whanau Ora

What difference will Whanau Ora make?

Whanau Ora is a restructuring of welfare services. There is no indication yet that welfare benefits are involved. Whanau ora promises to work with and reduce dysfunctional families. Dysfunctional families experience a range of negative occurrences; truancy, domestic violence, drug and alcohol abuse, teenage pregnancy, criminal offending, poor physical and mental ill-health are some.

Dependence on benefits is a big driver of dysfunction. Benefits - or a guaranteed weekly payment from Work and Income regardless - absolve people from working for a living and having positive, constructive and co-dependent relationships with other whanau members. Benefits allow people to live outside of functioning society.  Welfare services evolve as a response to this dysfunction. Services may ameliorate some of the problems but a significant reduction cannot be possible while the prime driver - benefits - remains unchanged.

The Whanau Ora taskforce report used an example of a working single mother whose children were going off the rails and was having to deal with various authorities. This example isn't typical however. The Early Start programme, the only programme that has systematically identified the neediest families, provided services to them and compared the outcomes to a control group that did not receive services, found 90 percent of their clients were on welfare. The problematic working mother does fit however with Tariana Turia's view that women should be allowed to stay on the DPB until their youngest dependent child completes his or her schooling.

It is possible that Maori will be better providers of welfare services for Maori people. John Tamihere maintains his organisation, the Waipareira Trust, can reduce youth offending if  given ample resourcing. But it is difficult to see by what mechanism whanau ora is going to ensure people 'meet their obligations' unless the trust also controls benefit inflow into the dysfunctional families they aim to assist.  That eventuality may still be a whanau ora goal. In the past trusts or agents have been appointed to manage benefits. As it stands however there is no intimation this is going to happen. The report specifies that there is, "... no expectation iwi would fund core services such as health or unemployment benefits."

The government claims that the 20 new whanau ora contracts will be a fiscally neutral policy. Funding will be drawn from the existing Health, Social Development and Maori Development budgets. This can only mean that there will be winners and there will be losers. We have yet to see which service providers are going to have their funding cut or lose it altogether.

The whanau ora concept focuses on the family and their collective responsibility. But in my experience working in a voluntary capacity with needy families, there is usually one (or two) individuals that pull the whanau down. Who make their own problems everybody else's. For instance Corrections complains about imprisoned whanau members pressuring their relatives to bring drugs into prison. This can take the form of intimidation or physical threats.  Hence the dysfunction multiplies. However the problem still begins  with,  and must be resolved by,  the individual.

Perhaps it is time to start talking more about personal responsibility instead of collective responsibility. When the US decided to grab welfare dependence and all the attendant dysfunction by the neck and give it a good shake they did so via new legislation called the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act. Clinton told Americans welfare, as they had known it, would change.

Simply changing the way services are provided will only scratch the surface if the  current benefit system remains unchanged.

Read the Whanau Ora report


The following is reproduced with permission from the author. The author's  permission does not  imply support for or agreement with other views expressed at this site.

Colin James's column for the Otago Daily Times
13 April 2010

The aura of the new whanau focus.

It was an inauspicious week to launch whanau ora: a week when it was revealed public funds going to a Maori health provider had gone missing.

When Tariana Turia was Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector in Helen Clark's government she ran into flak over where some money went. Labour chief whip Tim Barnett was put in to monitor the processes.

Since then Turia has broken with Labour, co-led her new party to five seats and into a governing arrangement with National and a ministerial post -- and
agreement from John Key to implement whanau ora.

Is this the revolution Pita Sharples says it is?

Turia said at the launch: "If you always do what you have always done you will always get what you have always got."

That is slippery ground for an indigenous rights party. Tradition is central to indigenous claims -- and to whanau ora. And is not tradition "doing what you have always done"?

The taskforce topped its list of principles with "nga kaupapa tuku iho (the ways in which Maori values, beliefs, obligations and responsibilities are available to guide whanau in their day-to-day lives)". It set as a test of success "when whanau are ... confidently participating in te ao Maori", the Maori world(view), and identified as its top "key operation element" "methodologies shaped by the values, protocols and knowledge contained within te ao Maori".

Confidence in one's cultural (and/or personal) identity is critical to social and economic success and urban Maori exhibit signs of a decultured underclass, which whanau ora's cultural dimension might usefully address. But is heavy emphasis on tradition the path forward into the modern, internationalised society and economy?  

And is Turia right to imply the government has just been doing what it has always done?

Actually, no. Whanau ora has a precursor.

Since early 2008 the Ministry of Social Development has been opening community link centres to deal with hard cases. These broadly do what whanau ora does: an "integrated approach around the whole family". Where relevant, this is done within a Maori framework and includes a self-determination element, reconnection with iwi and te reo.

Community link is outcomes-focused -- a major point of whanau ora. A plan is developed with a family, priorities are agreed and families helped to run themselves.

And, though this is still work in progress, it aims at coordinated action by the various agencies which deal with "at-risk" and "dysfunctional" families -- that is, adults-and-kids households which by mainstream standards are not "families" at all. Such households come to the attention of a range of agencies, from police to schools. If they operate separately, that leaves root causes unaddressed.

Thousands of families have been dealt with through this process. And it is expanding.

Or was. Turia's $1 billion has to come from somewhere. The most logical source will be from the service that most closely approximates whanau ora.

There are two political risks for Key.

One risk is that non-Maori, egged on by Winston Peters on state television, might resent what they see as special treatment for Maori. Key should be able to finesse this -- at least through to the 2011 election -- given his extraordinary ability to be nearly all things to nearly all people nearly all of the time.

The second risk is essentially for his second-term and comes in two parts.

One part is that, as Tony Ryall is demonstrating in health, boosting one spending area (in his case elective surgery) in tight-money conditions squeezes spending elsewhere: mental health and drug addiction, both important drivers of crime (now, it seems, off the government's radar) and services for the disabled and for old people who need help at home. That gradually builds pockets of resentment which over time hollow out a government's vote.

The second part is the risk that, with looser financial controls -- a sort of bulk funding approach -- some resources will be suboptimally spent and/or spent on activities "mainstream" New Zealand thinks dubious (remember the hip-hop tour) and/or siphoned off (the subject of last week's hoo-haa).

Enter Bill English. Before the budget he and Key have to have worked up more of a response to the taskforce than that there will not be a separately funded trust running whanau ora and that non-Maori will be eligible for the services (which presumably will widen John Tamihere's large, innovative Te Whanau o Waipareira Trust) though it is unclear how te ao Maori will apply.

English is a Southlander, with the right amount of suspicion to be the nation's treasurer. But he has a history in this area: as Health Minister in the 1990s he promoted iwi and Pasifika providers. And generally he favours a more diverse range of delivery mechanisms as a way of "getting more from less".
That's Turia's challenge. Getting more from less is tough. Much will be expected of her whanau ora teams. And Key's decentralised management style will leave the proof to her.


http://www.ColinJames.co.nz
Contact Lindsay Mitchell:

Ph/fx 04 562 7944
mob 021 132 5968

Lindsay@welfarereform.co.nz

Read Lindsay's Blog here.
This website intends to shine light on social security and welfare reform. The current welfare system is unsustainable economically, socially and morally. This site is also intended to be a resource for people interested in welfare reform. Please acknowledge the source of any material you use from this site. Thank you.
Other Information:
Maori & Welfare  and  Welfare & Crime
Need help to search Parliamentary Questions?
About
Many welfare models exist throughout the developed world.  New Zealand’s welfare system is unusual in two ways, firstly, because it is funded through general taxation. Secondly, [More...]
Lindsay Mitchell looks at Social Welfare Reform
in New Zealand and Overseas
CONTACT LINDSAY:
ph/fx 04 562 7944
mob 021 132 5968