spinofflive
Protesters against Oranga Tamariki’s treatment of Māori whānau march on parliament in 2019 (Photo: Ana Tovey/RNZ)
Protesters against Oranga Tamariki’s treatment of Māori whānau march on parliament in 2019 (Photo: Ana Tovey/RNZ)

ĀteaApril 30, 2021

Oranga Tamariki has breached Treaty, Waitangi Tribunal finds

Protesters against Oranga Tamariki’s treatment of Māori whānau march on parliament in 2019 (Photo: Ana Tovey/RNZ)
Protesters against Oranga Tamariki’s treatment of Māori whānau march on parliament in 2019 (Photo: Ana Tovey/RNZ)

The Waitangi Tribunal has released its urgent inquiry into Oranga Tamariki, concluding that the Crown’s care and protection system has breached te Tiriti o Waitangi. Charlotte Muru-Lanning explains.

What’s this inquiry about?

Oranga Tamariki, the government department tasked with ensuring the care and protection of vulnerable children, faced public scrutiny following a 2019 Newsroom investigation that featured footage of a newborn Māori baby being uplifted from its mother at a maternity ward. Various reports and inquiries resulted, including this one, which the Waitangi Tribunal gave urgent status, noting “tamariki Māori were suffering or likely to suffer significant and irreversible prejudice as a result of the current or pending actions of Oranga Tamariki”.

Oranga Tamariki was created in 2017 to replace Child, Youth and Family (CYFS) after an expert advisory panel found, in 2015, that it wasn’t meeting the needs of vulnerable children and young people.

There were three main issues the Waitangi Tribunal inquiry covered:

  • the causes of the over-representation of tamariki Māori in state care,
  • whether the changes made in 2017 are likely to remedy that over-representation
  • what further changes might be required in order for the Crown to uphold its obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its principles

The tribunal received 51 claims between November 2019 and July 2020 from individuals, whānau, hapū, iwi, and other entities including trusts, district Māori councils and rūnanga. 

What did the report find?

The tribunal found that disparity in outcomes for Māori is in part a result of the effects of alienation, dispossession and ongoing Crown efforts to assimilate Māori to Pākehā ways of life, and that these poor outcomes for tamariki Māori reflect the Crown’s failure to honour tino rangatiratanga guaranteed to Māori in te Tiriti of Waitangi. It also found that there have been breaches of the principles of partnership, active protection and options. Notably, the tribunal found the changes made in 2017 that created Oranga Tamariki were not enough to realise the type of transformations necessary to achieve a te Tiriti-consistent future in Aotearoa.   

What are the Waitangi Tribunal’s recommendations?

The primary recommendation is that the Crown steps back from further intrusion into what was reserved to Māori under Te Tiriti, and a Māori Transition Authority independent from the Crown and other departments is established. This authority’s primary function would be to identify the changes necessary to eliminate the need for state care of tamariki Māori. 

The report does not support calls for the abolition of Oranga Tamariki, saying that “for at least the foreseeable future we see a role for an Oranga Tamariki statutory social worker, backed by the state’s coercive powers, in cases where a Māori organisation meets resistance to an intervention considered necessary for the safety of a child or children”. 

In the report, presiding officer Michael Doogan says “we refrain from overly prescriptive recommendations and instead place emphasis upon the process by which Māori can lead the transformation”.

“While we accept that a significant transformation is required, we do not see it as simply a case of calculating and transferring to a new Māori organisation proportionate responsibility and resource from Oranga Tamariki,” says Doogan. “Such an approach risks transferring a number of system problems and also runs the risk of diverting focus onto resourcing issues before system design is properly worked through.”

So, they’re not calling for Oranga Tamariki to be completely disestablished?

Correct. 

What would the Māori Transition Authority do?

Its primary function will be to identify the changes necessary to eliminate the need for state care of tamariki Māori. It would be “given a wide mandate to consider system improvements both within and outside of the legislative and policy settings for Oranga Tamariki”.

What would the Crown’s role be in this?

The Crown would play a supporting role, but “it is not one that it can or should lead”.

Has the Crown acknowledged any existing problems?

Some. In November last year, Oranga Tamariki ,on behalf of the Crown, formally acknowledged there were issues on behalf of the Crown. Including an acknowledgment of structural racism within the care system, a failure to properly implement the recommendations of 1988 report Pūao Te Ata Tū and that historically, Māori perspectives have been ignored in the care and protection system. However, the Crown believes the policy changes introduced in 2017 will change the disparity for the better, a belief fundamentally at odds with the claimants.

What happens next?

It’s up to the government to make changes. The Waitangi Tribunal isn’t a court of law, which means its recommendations and findings are not binding on the Crown. Though the government has faced criticism for not following the recommendations of the Waitangi Tribunal, the recent announcement of an independent Māori Health Authority following a damning 2019 tribunal report that outlined the failure of the Crown in Māori wellbeing is a sign of potential change to come.

Keep going!
John Scott’s Futuna Chapel in Wellington (Photo: The Single Object)
John Scott’s Futuna Chapel in Wellington (Photo: The Single Object)

ĀteaApril 29, 2021

What John Scott taught me about architecture

John Scott’s Futuna Chapel in Wellington (Photo: The Single Object)
John Scott’s Futuna Chapel in Wellington (Photo: The Single Object)

John Scott broke barriers for Māori architecture – and paved the way for future generations of Māori architects like Jade Kake.

Sometimes I get asked the question: what is Māori architecture? What is Māori, exactly, about the buildings Māori architects design – especially in the absence of koru and kowhaiwhai, whakairo and tukutuku? Ornamentation can be a significant element of Māori architecture, but in my mind, this is superficial if it’s the only thing that is Māori about the building. Maybe this is the point made by Modernism.

I think of architecture as whakapapa, connecting people and places across space and time. I think of architecture as behaviour setting – a place for cultural practices and interactions and relationships underpinned by tikanga to occur. Sometimes the most Māori aspect of a building is the floor plan, especially in the arrangement of spaces that accommodate the way we want to live our lives and use and occupy space as Māori. 

Māori architecture involves listening closely to people and land. It’s the synthesis of culture, history and aspirations, a deep knowledge and understanding of people of place. It’s in the relationships that we nurture in the process. Finally, it is Māori architecture because we are Māori.

When I think of John Scott, I think of a tūāpapa, a foundation. As Dr Deidre Brown (Ngāpuhi, Ngāti Kahu) says, Scott broke barriers for Māori architecture and architects at a time when Māori architecture had been suppressed – including through legislation that banned the construction of raupō whare, and the Tohunga Suppression Act, which banned the transfer of Māori knowledge, particularly around things that were tapu. Scott was practising during the post-war era when Māori culture and identity were discouraged and assimilation was the norm. Māori architecture and visual expression more generally had very little status or visibility in the mainstream.  

I entered architecture school in 2006, and it wasn’t until near the end of my degree that I learned there were Māori architects. I had previously understood it as a very white profession, with Indigenous architecture relegated to the domain of (inevitably white) anthropologists. Now, as a young (arguably approaching mid-career) practitioner, I’m grateful for the foundation that has been laid by John Scott and other early Māori architects, paving the way for those of us who have followed. It’s not lost on me that we are able to practice architecture openly, as Māori – something which was largely denied to earlier generations. Notwithstanding the ongoing challenges, it’s an immense privilege to be able to have our own whānua and hapū as clients and to have our culture respected and represented in the design of public buildings and spaces. 

I had a formal, very conventional architectural education. Modernism, the way it was taught when I was a student, seemed incompatible with Indigenous ways of thinking and being. Modernism rejected ornamentation, and seemed diametrically opposed to so-called “vernacular” architecture, which is what Māori and Indigenous architecture was still largely classified as at that time. It was a revelation to me to discover Māori modernists – including John Scott and Rewi Thompson – because it challenged the fundamental precepts of modernism as I understood them at the time. It was through exposure to Māori modernists like John Scott that I grew to understand that modernism is not necessarily incompatible with our cultural practices and belief systems as Māori.

The pou in Futuna Chapel (Photo: The Single Object)

Form follows function can also be applied to tikanga, with the form of our spaces following and enabling cultural protocols to occur. Visual expression of the structure is an inherent aspect of Māori architecture, which can be evidenced in newer projects such Te Noho Kotahitanga marae (carved by Lyonel Grant – Te Arawa), which utilises traditional construction techniques which mean the carved elements are structural (rather than applied). Modernism also embraces the use of new materials produced by industrial processes that created new possibilities. Contemporaneously, Māori designers are at the forefront of utilising industrial processes to create new approaches to traditional concepts. This includes John Scott’s son, designer Jacob Scott (Ngāti Kahungunu) and his use of CNC technology to generate contemporary whakairo, and architect Derek Kawiti’s (Ngāti Hine, Tūhoe) use of 3D printing and other digital fabrication technologies to produce sculptural work and building-integrated elements.  

When I think of the impact John Scott has had on modernism, and the emergence of Māori modernism and contemporary Māori architecture more generally, I think about the essential elements that have been transposed and reinterpreted within contemporary spaces. Elements like the pou. 

A pou is an element that creates the space between Ranginui and Papatūānuku, between earth and sky. The pou is embodied in the rākau, whether it’s anchored in the ground or milled for timber. More than a column, a pou is an anchor, the centre, the heart of the building. 

In my architectural education, piloti – reinforced, ground level supporting columns – featured heavily. Architects and students of architecture will no doubt be intimately familiar with the Villa Savoye in Poissy, France, designed by Le Corbusier. Piloti were significant as progress in industrial processes meant that for the first time, slender, reinforced load-bearing columns were possible. A piloti creates space, enabling open floor plans and a ‘free’ facade, the non-load bearing wall permitting more freedom in openings. 

A pou also creates space around it, but in a different way. Holding up the roof, the sky, pou creates space that radiates out from the centre. Piloti recede, but pou radiate. Futuna Chapel, that iconic building by John Scott, is centred around a pou tokomanawa. The interior of the space reminds me of Rangiātea Church in Ōtaki, built more than a hundred years prior, a series of pou that hold up the sky. In Futuna, the pou is at the centre: the radiating struts branch out like a tree, filling the space and supporting the canopy, the interlocking gables of the roof. Jacob Scott said that as a column can be a pou, a person can also be a pou. John Scott’s legacy is in the way he has created not only spaces, but space for future generations, a tall kauri creating the light in which we are able to exist and flourish.