Volunteer workers ‘exploited’

Press, 27 January 1986, Page 8

Volunteer workers ‘exploited’

Voluntary workers were being exploited by the Social Welfare Department, said people at two huis which examined Maori needs during the week-end.

The department’s failure to reimburse expenses and. give financial incentive to people interested in helping young Maoris was a repeated criticism, levelled at the huis, held before a committee in Christchurch.

The committee, made up of senior officers from Government departments and Maori representatives, was established by the Minister of Social Welfare, Mrs Hercus, last August. It has been travelling throughout New Zealand hearing submissions, and will report to Mrs Hercus in May with a summary of its findings and a list of recommendations for change.

Because of the nature of the submissions and possible repercussions, the committee asked “The Press” not to identify those who made them.

One speaker said that

volunteers’ dedication and compassion was being exploited by the department — “cars run on petrol, not aroha (love)," he said.

The procedure for claiming expenses was complicated, and payments were often delayed. Many speakers at the huis called for more funding and financial independence for the Maatua Whangai programme, a Maori community-based foster care system that relies heavily on volunteers. The call “give us the money — we will do the job” was common. Reliance on the existing welfare system was criticised by some at the huis. The criteria for receiving department assistance was attacked. A maraebased social worker said that a person needed to be a street kid or a gang member to qualify for work or a special needs grant. Many young people in need of help missed out because they did not fit into a “problem” category, he said.

Another community worker said: “They (the department) want us to bleed all,over the place so they can give us money.” A Maatua Whangai volunteer said many children came into the - scheme only when they had committed an offence. That was too late for some to change their lifestyle and benefit from the programme.

An Anglican minister said that some social workers in the department were more interested in keeping up a quota of cases rather than solving them. He said social workers should strive to make themselves redundant. The need for more Maori social workers in the department was a frequent request, along with a strong Maori input into training. Tohunga (Maori priests) should be called on to advise and help staff, said one speaker. Maori people were made to feel small and were shunted from one officer to another in an effort to frustrate them,

said a voluntary foster mother. Showing anger was the only way to get results, she said. Religious groups were criticised for continuing a “colonial” mentality and being “patronising” in their treatment of Maoris. A "mother” to street kids said that Church houses intended for young people should be priced reasonably, instead of rent taking up much of their benefit money.

Maoris themselves were criticised. A prison officer said that many were abusing - their power within pakeha Institutions. Maori men had a responsibility to improve their treatment of women because they were the “backbone of Maoridom,” he said. A gang member criticised the failure of Maori elders to listen to what young people wanted, and said a lack of communication was responsible for many problems.

The value of the committee was questioned with some accusing it of being “window dressing” and tokenism. However, a

committee spokesman, Mr Peter Boag, said its work had raised expectations among Maoris that were impossible to ignore. The time and work spent gathering views and the strength of feeling among Maoris meant .changes in the welfare system were inevitable.

In spite of the faults identified by many speakers, the department was also praised by some who acknowledged the commitment and sensitivity of staff. Mr Boag said that in contrast with other areas throughout New Zealand, there were few personal attacks levelled at staff.

It was the committee’s job to listen to whatever people had to say, and no responses were made by them at the huis as a part of a deliberate plan to allow people to "speak their mind.” Although Christchurch department officers were present at the huis, their role was to listen and not to reply to criticism aimed at them.