We find that in developing a response to allegations of abuse in care, the Crown:
- adopted a strategy aimed primarily at managing financial and legal risk, rather than ensuring survivors were fairly treated
- failed to recognise, investigate or respond to signs of systemic abuse and systemic failures
- failed to consider its obligations under te Tiriti o Waitangi, and those under international human rights conventions.
We find that Crown Law:
- developed an overly adversarial culture in abuse in care cases, and lost sight of the people behind the claims who were abused while in the State’s care.
We find that the Ministry of Social Development, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Education, and Oranga Tamariki:
- developed out-of-court claims processes in an ad hoc, reactive and siloed way
- have not provided fair and consistent redress for abuse in care
- failed to provide an independent means for survivors to have their claims of abuse in care resolved
- did not involve survivors, particularly Māori survivors, in the design and operation of their claims processes
- failed to adequately take into account the Crown’s te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations in their claims processes, or incorporate tikanga Māori in them
- failed to consider international human rights obligations, including under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, in designing their redress processes
- failed to provide redress that is accessible to Deaf and disabled people, or adequately consider the accessibility of their claims processes
- have no principled basis for determining the size of financial payments made in their claims processes
- have been too slow in considering the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 when they consider claims
- except for the Ministry of Social Development, have not published sufficient information about their claims processes and how they assess claims
- do not take into account the impact of abuse on survivors’ whānau and communities, or intergenerational harm in their responses to abuse in care
- have not adequately investigated systemic causes of abuse to prevent further abuse in care.
Next: 2.4 Faith-based institutions' processes