Katene Rahui: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
Katene Rahui: Financial Review Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:9471] 
RAHUI KATENE (Maori Party—Te Tai Tonga) 
: 
 Members of the Maori Party were fascinated by the five pages that formed the substance of the report of the Justice and Electoral Committee on the Ministry of Justice. There has been a series of damning reports into the situation for Maori across the justice sector so it was our expectation that the financial review would make at least a cursory mention in passing of these reports and the ministry’s response. 
First off there was the report of March 2009—a 60-month follow-up analysis of the reconviction patterns of released prisoners. That report highlighted that the relatively high rates of re-imprisonment for Maori and for young offenders are particularly concerning. The re-imprisonment rate over 60 months for Maori offenders at 58 percent is over 10 percentage points higher than for European offenders and nearly 20 percentage points higher than for Pacific Island offenders. Yet the only mention of reconviction in the report was the reference to the decision to limit parole for the worst repeat offenders. 
The second report we thought would be entirely relevant for this report was the  
Offender Volumes Report 
 of 2009. The data in this report is depressingly familiar: the graphs reveal as at 30 June 2009 the preponderance of Maori males in the prison population especially in the younger age groups. As an example approximately twice as many Maori 25-year-old males are in prison as European males of the same age. Data upon data demonstrate that Maori offender volumes have increased at given snapshot dates. A quick glance at the evidence and advice received however tells us that such vital information about offender volumes was somehow not considered relevant. 
I turn to what we thought would have been a critical report for this ministry in terms of the emphasis on youth justice. We looked at the report presented by the Ministry of Social Development titled  
Effectiveness of Youth Court Supervision Orders: Measures of Re-offending 
. A key statement stands out in this report: “Currently in New Zealand there is no research on the effectiveness of Youth Court supervision orders in reducing the frequency and seriousness of re-offending.” There is reference in the financial review to the Youth Court and there is also reference to the involvement of the Ministry of Social Development. But this is where more questions are raised than resolved. Instead of drawing on this very significant finding the financial review suggests that the primary focus for the Ministry of Social Development was to ensure that the policy information was accurate “as distinct from advising on the appropriateness of expanding the jurisdiction of the Youth Court in this way.” I am sorry but this just does not add up. The Ministry of Social Development’s own research tells us that there is no research on the effectiveness of Youth Court supervision orders yet that information appears to have been ignored by the ministry in coming before the select committee. 
Some other major findings in that research have failed to make it to the financial review. One is the fact that Maori are overrepresented in the profile of youth offenders at 55 percent—a disproportionate figure relative to their proportion in the New Zealand population of 14 to 16-year-olds at 22 percent. Another is the extremely high recidivism rate: four out of five of the 1800 young people in the cohort committed at least one other offence within the follow-up period consistent across the three supervision orders. One would have thought an 80 percent reoffending rate would be worthy of comment. 
Finally I turn to another major report undertaken in the justice sector during the period of review. I suggest every member of Parliament look at this report; its title is  
Identifying and Responding to Bias in the Criminal Justice System: A Review of International and New Zealand Research 
. What is so useful about this report is not that it finally points out the well-known fact that certain groups are disproportionately represented in adverse criminal justice outcomes at successive stages of the criminal justice system; its key value is that it reports on the factors likely to bring about success in addressing ethnic disparities. It recommends that indigenous peoples should have a central role in programme design implementation and governance; that there should be a holistic approach to addressing structural inequalities more broadly; and that it should be appropriately monitored. 
I have bothered to go through these four different reports because it is our view that current New Zealand analysis and research on the key issues confronting the justice system should form a specific context to any financial review of the sector. These reports have told us that the current evidence depicts high and unchanging recidivism rates and continued overrepresentation of Maori at every level of the criminal justice system from apprehension through to recidivism. 
Yet what do we find when we look at the 2008-09 financial review? On the first page we find a whole paragraph dedicated to the large number of departmental officials who attended the hearing as if too many people at a hearing or meeting is one of the critical issues cutting through the sector. We fully appreciate the extra load that has landed on the Ministry of Justice in responding to not only the demands of electoral work following the general election in November 2008 but also the heavy focus on justice and law issues in the 100-day legislative programme of the new Government. But it is not as if the information is not on hand; these reports are all generated by various arms of Government: the Ministry of Justice the Ministry of Social Development and the Department of Corrections. The facts and figures are there for all to see—all except for the members of the Justice and Electoral Committee it seems. 
In one case even when the facts are explicit the review manages to slide past them in a way that downplays the reality. The youth justice sector of the report describes a question from the select committee as to whether the youth justice system continues to aim to take a diversionary approach to young offenders. The Ministry of Justice confirmed that this is still the intention yet the statistics tell us that prosecutions of youth offenders have increased while there has been an associated decrease in the numbers of alternative actions available. Indeed the report into child and youth offending describes youth prosecutions as trending upwards with the proportion of apprehensions resolved in this way increasing from 13.2 percent in 1995 to 28.1 percent in 2007. 
I have no pleasure at all in bringing to the Committee this up-to-date information about the performance of the justice sector. I do so reluctantly with two clear aims. The first is to enable a far more solid context in which to understand performance issues than is provided in the financial review and the second is to ensure that we have all information on hand in order that we do what is needed to create the solutions we so urgently desire. 
I believe the section on drivers of crime offers the one glimmer of hope we need in order to move forward. The financial review reports that the Minister of Maori Affairs and the Minister of Justice co-hosted a ministerial meeting on the drivers of crime in April 2009. That meeting was distinctive in its ambit as it sought to address the underlying causes of crime rather than just the criminal justice sector’s response to it. These causal factors included early childhood trauma disconnection from society and deterioration of family community and cultural support structures. So it is heartening to read in the report that addressing the drivers of crime would be established as a whole-of-Government priority. We certainly feel confident that with the work that Dr Sharples is leading in the drivers of crime policy and the work that Tariana Turia is leading in Whanau Ora we are embarking on pathways that can help to address these disproportionate and persistent statistics by drawing on the strength of whanau as our greatest resource. Thank you.