239. From the 1970s there was increasing pressure for Aotearoa New Zealand to become a more diverse and more accepting society. Across the last thirty years of the Inquiry period there were advances in human rights, in line with international developments, and some recognition of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Legislation was updated to recognise some rights and needs of people.

240. The State was reorganised along free market principles between 1984 and 1999, and increasingly sought to contract out services previously provided by the State.

241. It is also the period when understanding and awareness about abuse, neglect and trauma became better recognised and understood. There were increasing numbers of reports drawing attention to abuse and neglect in care settings, and from the mid-1980s some of the large children’s homes and psychiatric institutions began to close.

Ka kaha ake te hononga o te Māori me te Karauna
Māori–Crown relationship grows

242. The Māori Renaissance in the 1970s led to a resurgence of Māori identity and autonomy. Activism among Māori and some Pākehā was fuelled by events such as the eviction at Bastion Point in Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland.[306] In the 1970s and 1980s, significant changes were initiated, including the revision of Māori land law and increased Māori community participation in planning and management of State programmes.

243. Kara Puketapu, Secretary of the Department of Māori Affairs from 1977 to 1983, initiated the Tū Tangata programme, which focused on community-based Māori development. The overall aim of the programme was to promote cultural and economic advancement through encouraging self-reliance and self-determination at community levels.[307] The 1988 Puao-te-Ata-Tū Report also resulted in an increased focus on biculturalism in the public sector.[308]

244. Legislative references giving legal recognition to the Treaty began with the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, the State-Owned Enterprises Act 1986 and in early environmental law.[309] These legislative provisions are commonly referred to as “Treaty clauses”.

245. In 1985 an amendment to the Treaty of Waitangi Act extended the jurisdiction of the Waitangi Tribunal to cover claims for historical breaches of Te Tiriti o Waitangi from 6 February 1840 onwards.[310] Before this, its jurisdiction had only covered contemporary claims for breaches of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. The modern Treaty settlements era began in the 1990s. The first major settlements occurred in the 1990s with the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act in 1992 and the Waikato-Tainui and Ngāi Tahu settlements in 1995 and 1998.

246. Treaty clauses have two common forms:

• general, requiring decision makers or those exercising functions under an Act to consider or act in accordance with the Treaty principles
• specific, referencing the Crown’s Treaty responsibilities and prescribing how these are given effect to in the Act.[311]

247. Research shows that once tamariki and rangatahi Māori were brought to the attention of the State, they were more likely than non-Māori to be taken into social welfare care. This was for both care and protection and youth justice purposes.

248. While many of the efforts to recognise Māori culture and calls for self-determination were genuine, some commentators suggest that these only amounted to changes in the State’s strategies to achieve policy goals “that do not depart significantly from 19th-century assimilationist goals”.[312]

249. In 1989, the State proposed a partnership model with iwi, aimed at transforming the Māori–Crown relationship and devolving social services to iwi.[313] The newly formed Ministry of Māori Affairs was charged with encouraging Māori expression of rangatiratanga, although this expression would be subject to it enhancing Aotearoa New Zealand’s economic, social and cultural life as defined by the State. The Runanga Iwi Act 1990 was enacted to provide for iwi to become ‘authorised voices’ enabled to exercise powers granted to them under the Act by the State to deliver social, economic and cultural programmes.[314]

250. Despite the proposals to devolve services, power was still in in State hands. Many saw this as institutional assimilation rather than the partnership the Crown claimed it was seeking with iwi; “‘a denial of rangatiratanga rather than progress towards it”.[315] Others argued that making “provision for Māori cultural preferences…[as] an “extra”” within existing State frameworks was rooted in colonial notions of cultural superiority.[316]

251. The move towards devolution was diverted in the 1990s, with the Government emphasising mainstreaming State service delivery to Māori instead. Services were organised around supporting the not-for-profit sector and providing for Māori entities to tender for Crown contracts.[317] Although the number of Māori service providers rose from “almost zero to more than a thousand”,[318] Māori argued that the State’s procurement rules constrained the exercise of rangatiratanga, and thus fell short of the partnership required under the Treaty of Waitangi:[319]

“…any resources or powers conceded to Māori communities could be taken back if the actions of the recipients displeased ministers or officials”.[320]

Ka tīmata te tino kite i te Māori i ngā pūnaha taurima
Māori begin to be over-represented in care

252. During the Inquiry period, once tamariki and rangatahi Māori were brought to the attention of the State, they were more likely than non-Māori children to be taken into social welfare care. Once in social welfare care, Māori were more likely to be criminalised or placed in a harsher environment, and less likely to receive intensive support, than non-Māori.[321]

253. At the Inquiry’s Contextual Hearing, expert witnesses Dr Moana Jackson and Dr Rawiri Waretini-Karena highlighted this over-representation as an integral part of colonisation, assimilation, and racism in Aotearoa New Zealand.[322]

254. In the 1970s NZ Police were more likely to apprehend and prosecute tamariki and rangatahi Māori than their Pākehā counterparts for similar offences.[323] These biases also existed in the courts. Mr SO, a social worker during the 1970s and 1980s, saw institutional racism in the courts’ treatment of Māori:

“The courts had an attitude, and the police had an attitude, too. The court acted differently to young Māori compared to young Pākehā offenders. The court was more willing to give second chances and lighter sentences to Pākehā offenders.” [324]

255. Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, there were increasing concerns about issues such as poor conditions, ill-treatment and racism in overcrowded social welfare institutions.[325]

256. There was also growing understanding that the care and protection and youth justice systems operated in direct opposition to Māori concepts of whānau and tino rangatiratanga.[326]

Ngā pāpātanga ki ngā iwi Pasifika i ngā urutomotanga atatū
Pacific Peoples impacted by Dawn Raids

257. As a relatively wealthy country with educational and economic opportunities, Aotearoa New Zealand was known to some people in the Pacific islands as “the land of milk and honey”.[327] For New Zealanders, the Pacific islands represented a source of cheap labour.[328]

258. The economic downturn of the 1970s led to a State focus on Pacific Peoples and made their “place in Aotearoa New Zealand both difficult and precarious”.[329] Pacific Peoples faced increasing discrimination and backlash. The State falsely accused “overstaying” Pacific Peoples of both taking New Zealanders’ jobs and being a burden on society through unemployment.[330]

259. This led to what is now known as the Dawn Raids, which involved NZ Police raiding the homes and workplaces of Pacific Peoples, often in the early hours of the morning, and “…employing aggressive or intimidatory tactics” to find overstayers with expired work permits.[331]

260. The Dawn Raids began in 1974 under the Labour Government. A new series of Dawn Raids occurred in 1976 after the National Government was elected in 1975 and had drawn on racist stereotypes to distort societal views of Pacific Peoples.[332] These raids were carried out at any time of the day or night by NZ Police specifically targeted Pacific Peoples rather than other groups of workers who had also overstayed their visas.[333]

261. Pacific communities were distressed by the raids. Imprisonment and deportation disrupted families’ and individuals’ lives. Children and young people could find themselves alone while parents and caregivers were processed as overstayers.[334] Some enduring effects of the Dawn Raids included Pacific Peoples and the term overstayer being seen as one and the same, and experiences of ongoing and widespread racism.

262. The Dawn Raids also affected Pacific Peoples’ relationships with authorities. The Dawn Raids lasted until 1976, only stopping after strong community protests and criticism.[335]

263. Despite the challenges they faced, Pacific Peoples remained resilient and built their own support systems. Pacific churches became both spiritual and community hubs. For many, churches replaced the village structures of their previous homes.[336] The significance of the church to Pacific Peoples increased the number of pastoral care relationships between clergy and young people.

Ngā panonitanga ki ngā penihana tokoora me te whakahouhia ōhanga
Changes to welfare benefits and economic restructuring

Ka whakauruhia te penihana take kāinga
Domestic Purposes Benefit introduced

264. By the 1970s, social attitudes towards single motherhood were changing and more babies born to unmarried mothers stayed with their mothers than were placed up for adoption.[337]

265. The 1973 introduction of the Domestic Purposes Benefit, for which unmarried mothers and other sole parents were eligible, was a sign of some relaxation of social attitudes towards sex outside of marriage and made it easier for single women to keep their babies.[338] Both single parents and women leaving relationships benefited from the DPB once it was introduced.

266. These changes came out of the recommendations of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Social Security. Established in 1969, the Commission reported back in 1972 with the core principle that the State should “ensure ... that everyone is able to enjoy a standard of living much like that of the rest of the community and thus is able to feel a sense of participation and belonging to the community”.[339] Other changes included an increase in the Family Benefit from $3 to $6 a week,[340] equivalent to around $80 in 2024.[341]

Ka whakauruhia he tautoko mō te hunga whaikaha
Support for disabled people introduced

267. The 1967 Woodhouse Report, which had recommended a public insurance scheme for people with impairments, was the foundation for the passage of the Accident Compensation Act 1972 and the establishment of the Accident Compensation Commission (later Corporation), ACC, in 1974. The new ACC system removed an individual’s right to sue an individual or organisation in relation to injuries caused by accident and replaced it with public funding for the costs of living and rehabilitation.

268. The ACC system only covered people whose impairment had been acquired by an accident or certain criminal acts. People who were congenitally Deaf or born with a disability were excluded.[342]

269. The original recommendations in the Woodhouse Report were for the system to include support for people whose impairments did not result from an accident, and a later attempt was made to extend the scope of ACC.[343] The system created ongoing inequities between people disabled by accident, and people with who acquired their disability in other ways, who were not covered by ACC.[344]

270. The Disabled Persons Community Welfare Act 1975 was introduced to further promote access to community-based supports and services for disabled people.[345] It provided some support and assistance for disabled people not covered by ACC.

271. It introduced accessible building standards and provided for home alterations, motor vehicle purchase and vehicle modification and other financial assistance. This was to increase accessibility for disabled people within the community. Under this regime, training facilities for people with learning disabilities and short-term care for disabled children were provided.[346]

272. A Handicapped Child Allowance was introduced in 1978 for people looking after children with a severe physical or mental disability. Initially set at $8 per week, it was later increased to $14.50 per week.[347]

273. Despite these changes, many disabled people “had considerable difficulties in proving their eligibility to access services and other resources, and therefore were unable to access adequate supports to be able to fully participate in their community.”[348]

Ngā whakahoutanga o ngā tau 1980
1980s reforms

274. In 1984 the new Labour Government began restructuring the economy and transforming how the State sector was run. This restructure was influenced by neoliberal ideas and was an attempt to address long-standing issues with the structure and performance of Aotearoa New Zealand’s economy.[349]

275. The restructure had an immediate social effect. State sector restructuring alone added 40,000 unemployed to the benefit queue, while major manufacturing industries such as forestry declined by 67 percent.[350]

276. All of this had a disproportionately negative impact on social and economic outcomes for Māori and Pacific Peoples.[351] Māori have been described as the “shock absorbers” of these reforms, bearing the brunt as many worked in the industries most affected by the economic restructure as well as government jobs in forestry, the post office and the railways that were disestablished in the restructures.[352] The resulting unemployment levels for Māori increased educational, health and socioeconomic disparities between Māori and non-Māori.[353] It also made them more likely to experience State intervention in their family life.[354] There was a corresponding negative impact social and economic outcomes for Pacific Peoples.

Ngā awenga o te paheketanga ōhanga i ngā tau 1990
Impacts of recession in the 1990s

277. The economic reforms begun in 1984 under the fourth Labour Government and continued into the 1990s under the fourth National Government. In 1991, the State began a programme of economic and welfare reform.[355] This negatively impacted all children and young people, but disproportionately affected Māori and Pacific children and young people.[356]

278. The reforms increased unemployment and widened the gap between rich and poor. From the mid-1980s to mid-2000s, the increase in inequality in Aotearoa New Zealand was the greatest recorded anywhere in the developed world.[357]

Ka kapi haere ngā whare hauora hinengaro,hauora hinengaro tamariki hoki
Psychiatric and psychopaedic hospitals begin to close

279. The Mental Health Foundation was established in 1977, at a time when mental distress was not generally spoken about openly. The Foundation had its roots in the belief that early developmental experiences are critical to people’s lifelong mental health and was formed to promote the mental health and wellbeing of all New Zealanders.[358]

280. The public’s fear of mental distress continued throughout the 1980s and 1990s. The 1988 Mason Report stated that:

“The general population appears to have a very distorted image of psychiatric patients. This image is influenced by a lack of education and knowledge of the major psychiatric disorders and a misconception that psychiatric illness is inextricably linked with dangerousness.”[359]

281. The 1980s and 1990s also featured increased recognition of the lack of appropriate care and resourcing for people who experienced mental distress. including inquiries into the mental health system in the mid-1980s and 1990s.[360]

282. The Mental Health Act 1992 provided a new definition of mental disorder and set out patients’ rights and processes, reviews and inquiries to protect them.[361] The intent was to provide compulsory treatment in the least intrusive and restrictive way, but medical professionals could still require compulsory treatment and incarceration.

283. The State set up an Inquiry in 1995 to investigate serious shortcomings in the mental health system. The resulting second Mason Report was released in 1996 and highlighted issues with funding, discrimination and the workforce.[362]

“The Mental Health strategy is basically a fairly good document, but it has no legs. If it remains standing still it is nothing more than a vision statement.”[363]

284. Following the second Mason Report, the Mental Health Commission was established in 1996 and the State increased funding for community mental health support services. The Mason Report advised that the Mental Health Commission should be a single organisation responsible for mental health planning, including policy, purchases and service provision.[364]

285. The State did not implement this advice but tasked the Commission to monitor the national mental health strategy. The Mason Report’s support for an anti-stigma campaign led to the establishment of the Like Minds – Like Mine programme in 1997.[365]

286. From the 1970s to the 1990s, large scale institutions were slowly replaced with smaller group settings. By 1996, almost all psychopaedic and psychiatric hospitals had closed.

287. By the early 1990s, IHC was providing residential and other forms of disability support to 10,500 adults with learning disabilities.[366]

288. Mental health services were largely devolved to a range of outpatient services and community providers.[367]

289. Despite shifting towards smaller scale care, many of the same issues experienced in large institutions were the same in these new care settings, including a regimented routine, isolation, discrimination, disablism, ableism and a lack of self-determination.

Ka piki te aroā ki te whanaketanga me te tūkinotanga tamariki
Increasing awareness of child development, abuse and trauma

Te whakapiki mātauranga o te whanaketanga tamariki
Increasing knowledge of child development

290. Ideas and understandings of child development continued to grow during this period. During the 1970s Albert Bandura’s social learning theory integrated behavioural and cognitive approaches by focusing on the impact of observing others’ behaviour and its consequences. In the late 1970s, Russian psychologist L. S. Vygotsky’s Mind in Society proposed that society shapes the mind’s internal processes, influencing perception, memory and interaction with the world. Russian-American psychologist Urie Bronfenbrenner published The Ecology of Human Development, critiquing traditional developmental research and introducing an ecological systems theory that focused on development and behaviour within the context of different social systems. [368] From the 1970s, James and Jane Richie, psychologists teaching at the University of Waikato, argued for physical discipline of children to be made illegal and that it was damaging both to children and society.[369]

291. Te ao Māori concepts in child development and the kōhanga reo movement played an important part in understandings of child development in the 1980s and 1990s. Dr Arapera Royal Tangaere described Māori theory of child development and learning in 1993, likening the concepts behind the poutama steps design – commonly found in tukutuku panels – to Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development, and the tuakana-teina concept to the concept of scaffolding in Western learning and development theory.[370]

292. Dr Tangaere also related Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory to Rangimarie Turuki (Rose) Pere’s conception of Mai i Rangiatea, emphasising the importance of learning mātauranga Māori to child development:

“In doing so, the internalisation process depicts the way the child will interact in relation to the spiritual world, to people, to the land, and to the environment. Te reo Māori is the key to this knowledge.”[371]

Ka nui haere te aroā ki te tūkinotanga tamariki
Greater awareness of child abuse

293. Throughout the 1970s, a growing societal awareness of abuse led to more suspected cases of child abuse being reported. The number of notifications to the Department of Social Welfare rose to nearly 20,000 by the end of the 1990s.[372]

294. A birth cohort study looking at a century of sexual abuse victimisation found that the highest prevalence for child sexual abuse was for the cohort born from 1951 to 1960 at 28.7 percent. Prevalence remained high for the period from 1961 to 1980 and was about 20 percent from 1980 onwards.[373]

295. As understanding and awareness grew, State agencies involved in care delivery progressively incorporated responses to risks and issues related to child sexual abuse into their policies.

Ka tipu te māramatanga ki te whakahapatanga
Understanding of trauma grows

296. Understandings of trauma and its impacts began to grow from the 1970s. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was added to the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) in 1980, although it was thought at the time to be limited to people with experience of war and human-made disasters such aeroplane crashes.[374] The diagnostic criteria for PTSD were revised in 1987 and 1994, with the recognition that it was much more common than originally believed and including symptoms specific to children. A definition of trauma as a separate diagnosis from PTSD was not available until 2013.[375]

He whakamārama mō te whakahapatanga
Some understanding of neglect

297. Throughout the Inquiry period there was some understanding, domestically and internationally, of the factors that could lead to neglect. Neglect often proved hard to define or detect, and different parenting practices across cultures added to the difficulties in reaching a common definition for childhood neglect.[376] Understanding of the consequences of neglect began to be better understood from the 1990s, with advances in understanding of brain development and studies such as the Bucharest Early Intervention Project which studied outcomes for children in Romanian orphanages.[377] A 2010 paper by the Ministry of Social Development noted that neglect still received less scientific and public attention compared to other forms of maltreatment.[378]

Te tipu o te aroā ki ngā mōtika tangata
Increased awareness of human rights

298. Since becoming a member of the United Nations in 1945, Aotearoa New Zealand has actively participated in international forums and organisations to promote human rights.[379] Aotearoa New Zealand contributed to the drafting and adoption of key human rights instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 and played a role in negotiating and ratifying international human rights treaties during the latter half of the 20th century.[380]

299. Despite its international reputation, Aotearoa New Zealand could be slow in promoting human rights treaties domestically.[381] Human rights protections in Aotearoa New Zealand’s domestic laws are set out in a variety of statutes and the common (court-made) law.[382] This means they are not all in one place and not all human rights have been incorporated into our domestic law.

300. If individuals in Aotearoa New Zealand believe their rights have been violated, they can complain to Te Kāhui Tika Tangata Human Rights Commission, which offers a free and confidential dispute resolution service for complaints about prohibited behaviours under the Human Rights Act 1993. If an individual is unable to resolve their complaint through the Te Kāhui Tika Tangata Human Rights Commission, they can file a claim with the Human Rights Review Tribunal.

301. Those unable to resolve their complaints through domestic pathways can seek resolution through United Nations human rights bodies, noting the decisions from these bodies are not legally binding. Aotearoa New Zealand reports on its human rights progress every four to five years through the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process. The UPR provides the opportunity for each member State to update on the measures they have taken to enhance human rights domestically and to fulfil their human rights obligations.[383]

302. Aotearoa New Zealand took a number of steps during the Inquiry period to specifically incorporate rights from some human rights instruments into domestic law:

•  in 1971 the Office of the Race Relations Conciliator was established to promote positive race relations in Aotearoa New Zealand, and to settle complaints of racial discrimination and racial harassment
• in 1977, the New Zealand Human Rights Commission was formed to promote a wider range of human rights issues.[384] The Human Rights Commission exercises its functions through a mix of measures such as public advocacy, training and education campaigns, public statements on important human rights issues, submissions to Parliament and litigation[385]
• the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 is the key source of legal obligation for human rights in Aotearoa New Zealand.[386] It gives legal effect to core civil and political rights but rights from the international convention on economic, social and cultural rights are excluded
• the Human Rights Act 1993 aimed to improve on the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and better protect human rights: for example, by adding disability as grounds for discrimination. This was the result of many years of lobbying by disabled people.[387]

303. Numerous issues were raised across the later part of the Inquiry period with human rights abuses in care settings, including the use of solitary confinement and allegations of torture.[388]

Mōtika Māori
Māori rights

304. Ongoing calls by Māori for change raised awareness of the racism and discrimination Māori consistently faced, and some changes came about as a result.[389] Māori calls for change were the catalyst for the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 and establishment of the Waitangi Tribunal in 1975. These provided a legal process for historic Te Tiriti o Waitangi claims and breaches to start to be investigated.

305. Ngā Tamatoa (The Warriors) was a Māori activist group formed in the 1970s to promote Māori rights. It protested breaches of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Its tactics included nationwide petitions to have the Māori language taught in schools, and submissions on State policy.[390]

306. Te Rōpū Matakite o Aotearoa campaigned against the loss of Māori land and organised the 1975 Māori land march. The Women’s Anti-Racism Action Group was formed in 1984 to report on institutional racism in the Department of Social Welfare.

307. The Auckland Committee on Racism and Discrimination (ACORD) worked to bring attention to abuse in care, highlighting the appalling treatment of tamariki and rangatahi Māori within foster care and institutions.[391]

308. In the 1980s, Māori continued to raise concerns about tamariki and rangatahi Māori in social welfare care settings.[392] In 1983, the Department of Social Welfare started the Maatua Whāngai programme to place tamariki and rangatahi Māori in Māori homes rather than social welfare institutions.[393]

309. Amid calls from Māori for tino rangatiratanga, the State set up a ministerial advisory committee in 1985 to gain a Māori perspective on how the Department of Social Welfare was operating.[394] This resulted in the Puao-te-Ata-Tū Report. That report promoted a philosophy of self-help and gave a name to institutional racism. Chairman John Rangihau concluded:

“At the heart of the issue is a profound misunderstanding or ignorance of the place of the child in Māori society and its relationship with whānau, hapū, and iwi structures.”[395]

310. The Puao-te-Ata-Tū Report recommended that Mātua Whāngai be adequately and appropriately funded through tribal authorities to focus on nurturing children within their family groups as the primary alternative to a child going into care.[396]

311. The Puao-te-Ata-Tū Report and the resulting legislation — the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 — were considered ahead of their time.[397] The Department of Child, Youth and Family Services was established, and the report and the legislation were intended to make whānau, hapū and iwi central to addressing the issue of children and young people risk.

312. There were issues with the implementation of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989. Experts at this Inquiry’s hearings said that the transformative change envisioned by Puao-te-Ata-Tū and the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 never eventuated. They attributed this to a lack of momentum to sustain the changes needed, a lack of resourcing, a change in government and a political focus on family responsibility and business efficiency in State services in the 1990s. This analysis has been echoed by historians.[398]

Mōtika Turi
Deaf rights

313. During the first half of the Inquiry period, Deaf children, young people and adults were actively discouraged or banned from speaking sign language in care settings, particularly schools. By the 1970s, Aotearoa New Zealand and the international community were aware that the policy of oralism (undertaken for the past 100 years) needed to change.[399]

314. This led to the introduction in 1979 of the Total Communication approach into the education system. Total Communication used some signing but mirrored English language and grammar. It continued to prohibit Deaf people from communicating in the way they wanted to.[400] It was not until the late 1980s that the State and general public were increasingly aware and accepting that Deaf people had their own language and culture.[401]

315. Some other developments during this period included:

• 1977 – Deaf Association of New Zealand formed
• 1983 – first national Deaf awareness week held
• 1985 – first training course for NZSL interpreters
• 1993 – first national hui for tāngata Turi Māori held
• 1995 – the Ako report, commissioned by Te Pūni Kōkiri, finds that tāngata Turi Māori suffer additional discrimination due to being both Deaf and Māori, and that this needed to be recognised for tāngata Turi Māori to fully exercise their tino rangatiratanga in order to fulfil their aspirations in both the Māori and Deaf communities.[402]

316. Tāngata Turi Māori identify as both Māori and Deaf, and face barriers including a lack of trained interpreters who know both New Zealand Sign Language and te reo Māori. While they are overrepresented in Deaf statistics, tāngata Turi Māori perspectives are underrepresented in Deaf policies.[403]

Mōtika whaikaha
Disability rights

317. During the 1960s and 1970s, the disability rights movement challenged the State’s policies and approach to the care of disabled people. Internationally, disabled people developed the social model of disability in response to the traditional medical model and attitudes.[404] The social model “asserts that a person is disabled by society rather than by their body or abilities”.[405]

318. The social model of disability, with its emphasis on removing attitudinal and physical barriers to participation, led to policy shifts that enabled the closure of large institutions. The movement to deinstitutionalise Aotearoa New Zealand began through the advocacy of several groups and individuals. Deinstitutionalisation was first proposed in the third report of the Royal Commission into Hospital and Related Services in 1973. This report was highly critical of putting people into institutions and recommended community-based care.[406]

319. From 1974, the State stopped building new psychiatric and psychopaedic hospitals.[407] Existing institutions remained open and continued to be used. Closing psychiatric and psychopaedic institutions took more than 30 years, with Kimberley, the last of the big psychopaedic hospitals, closing in 2006.

320. The first pan-disability advocacy group, the Disabled Persons Assembly, was established in 1983. This was shortly after the United Nations International Year of Disabled Persons in 1981. Other disabled person’s organisations joined this growing movement, including what eventually became Deaf Aotearoa.[408]

321. The Aotearoa Network of Psychiatric Survivors was created in 1990 to support users of mental health services and improve the mental health system. It lobbied for deinstitutionalisation of care and community-based housing for former patients.[409]

322. Māori disability rights activists note that despite having higher rates of disability than non-Māori, Māori are not always represented in advocacy and activist groups for disability.[410] In addition, disability frameworks such as the social model view disability as largely individual. This is at odds with indigenous perspectives, which are holistic and collective.[411]

323. The growing trend towards mainstreaming the education of learning-disabled children led the Department of Education’s special residential school rolls to shrink during the 1980s.[412] The Education Act 1989 formalised the move away from special residential schools to the State education system by increasing provisions for disabled children in mainstream education.[413] However, the Secretary of Education could still direct a disabled child to attend a special school or class.

324. In 1994 the State passed the Health and Disability Commissioner Act. As part of moves to ensure that consumers of health and disability services would have the right to be treated fairly, a Code of Health and Disability Consumer’s Rights was produced. An independent commissioner was appointed, assisted by a free, independent national advocacy service to support people to make complaints under the code.[414]

325. The 1992 Mental Health Act established the Mental Health Review Tribunal, an independent body appointed by the Minister of Health to decide among other things, whether patients are fit to be released from compulsory status, investigate complaints about breaches of patient rights, and appoint second-opinion psychiatrists.[415]

326. The international disability rights movement was also at the forefront of disability policies, with “Nothing about us without us” becoming the international slogan.[416] Aotearoa New Zealand established a Minister for Disability Issues in 1999.

Mōtika Takatāpui
Gay rights

327. The psychiatric profession’s position on homosexuality as a mental illness began to shift by the 1970s. Psychiatric bodies in several countries removed homosexuality from their catalogues of mental disorders. In Aotearoa New Zealand, some of the key events in these decades included:

• 1973 – the first national lesbian organisation, Sisters for Homophile Equality (SHE), was formed
• 1970s – Aotearoa New Zealand Gay Pride Week and march begins
• 1985 – Fran Wilde, Labour Member of Parliament for Te Whanganui-ā-Tara Wellington, introduced the Homosexual Law Reform Bill. It passed in 1986, decriminalising sexual relations between adult men
• 1993 – the Human Rights Act was passed and included the prohibition of discrimination based on sexual orientation.[417]

Mōtika tamariki
Rights of children

328. Specific rights for children and young people increased across the last three decades of the Inquiry period. The Children and Young Persons Act 1974 allowed the Children’s Court to remand children and young people in penal institutions if there was no suitable alternative.[418] This was changed in 1985 when only those aged 16 years and over who committed violent offences could be sent to a penal institution.[419]

329. The Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 established the role of the Children’s Commissioner.[420] The Commissioner’s role is to assess and monitor the policies and practices provided under the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 and the outcomes being achieved for children in care.[421]

330. Aotearoa New Zealand ratified the United Nation Convention of the Rights of the Child (UNCROC) in 1993. UNCROC defines a child as every human below the age of 18 years. Article 19 specifies the child’s right to protection from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse.[422]

331. The convention reflected decades of activism and growing awareness of children’s rights. It set out children’s rights and the responsibility of parents, adults and governments to ensure children receive these entitlements. The convention was instrumental in creating a new perspective toward children in the countries that signed up. Aotearoa New Zealand signed the convention in 1993.[423]

332. The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child (UNCROC) expressed its concern in 1997 that Aotearoa New Zealand’s minimum age for charging a child with serious offences did not conform with the definition of the child in the UNCROC and recommended “that the [New Zealand] Government pursue the process of bringing existing legislation into line with the principles and provisions of the Convention”.[424]

Mōtika iwi Pasifika
Pacific Peoples’ rights

333. Pacific Peoples born in Aotearoa New Zealand formed the Polynesian Panther Party in response to the growing racism and discrimination they faced.[425] The Polynesian Panther movement was the major opposer of the Dawn Raids and fought for a fairer immigration policy, and for better conditions for Pacific migrant workers.

334. Through their efforts they drew national attention to the poor conditions of Pacific migrants and the discrimination they faced.[426]