Paper 11: Māori and Pacific Peoples
Proposal
1 This paper addresses the question "How can this work for Māori and Pacific peoples?" in the implementation phase of each of the initiatives proposed in this suite of papers. The solution will include:
- consultation with Māori practitioners, providers, and offenders on practical initiatives, on potential and capability, on gaps in service provision, and on the co-ordination of agency effort; and
- more forceful use of the justice sector outcomes framework.
Executive summary
2 Adjusting for the size of different populations, in 2003:
- Four to five times as many Māori as Europeans were apprehended, prosecuted and convicted. Six to seven times as many Māori were given a custodial sentence or were serving prison sentences, and eleven times as many were remanded in custody awaiting trial.
- About twice as many Pacific peoples as Europeans were apprehended, prosecuted, convicted, or given a custodial sentence; and three times as many were serving prison sentences or remanded in custody. Half of all Pacific offenders who received a custodial sentence were convicted of a violent offence.
4 Pacific peoples' over-representation in the criminal justice system is not as large as for Māori, but seems to be centred on similar socio-economic risk factors.
5 The proposals that are included in the other papers in this suite apply to all New Zealanders, regardless of ethnicity. While several of the proposals could reduce the absolute number of Māori and Pacific peoples in prison, they will not in themselves reduce the proportion of prisoners who are Māori or Pacific peoples.
6 Across New Zealand, and at different stages of the criminal justice system, there are programmes for Māori and Pacific peoples that are said to be effective or that show promise. Considerable practitioner expertise and volunteer effort has developed in agencies and in community-based service deliverers. Success, though, is often dependent on individuals rather than structures and systems, and is not easily replicable. There is evidence of agency disconnection and fragmentation in implementing programmes.
7 Officials have not identified new initiatives specific to Māori and Pacific peoples that would reliably and sustainably affect their offending.
8 All in all, the criminal justice system needs to do far better at stemming the entry of Māori and Pacific peoples, and managing their exit. Issues that need to be addressed include:
- How the Government can best support Māori and Pacific peoples' communities to reduce victimisation, offending and re-offending, and improve responsiveness to programmes developed by Māori and Pacific peoples' communities.
- How the Government can best support families/whānau of offenders who are involved in remand/bail, restorative justice and family group conferences, home detention, and prisoner re-integration.
- How to ensure consistency and fairness for Māori and Pacific peoples at all points in the criminal justice system where there is an element of discretion.
9 It is proposed that the implementation phase of proposals identified in this suite of papers address how they can best contribute to reducing Māori and Pacific peoples' offending, re-offending and imprisonment rates. This will include working with Māori and Pacific peoples' communities to identify practical initiatives that address Māori and Pacific peoples at risk in the criminal justice system, and ways that they can be enhanced and supported. It will also include an investigation of the unintended consequences of discretion at various stages in the criminal justice system and unevenness of decision making. The implications for consistency and fairness for Māori and Pacific peoples will require a programme of work to address these issues.
10 It is recommended that the revised outcomes framework for the justice sector be used by agencies to report on progress on reducing Māori and Pacific peoples' offending.
Background
11 The proposals in this suite of papers focus on interventions that protect and promote community safety, retain tough policies for serious and violent offenders, find better ways to use resources through the use of alternative sanctions for less serious offenders, and promote victims' and society's interests in crime reduction. In the course of its work the project team has:
- consulted with a Māori and Pacific Peoples Advisory Group, comprising advisors from within justice sector agencies and the Treasury;
- consulted with Te Puni Kōkiri and the Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs;
- participated in a hui of Police Iwi Liaison officers and a national fono of Pacific Police officers; and
- reviewed past studies and reports on Māori and the criminal justice system.
12 The analysis and proposals in this paper are the result of that process.
Comment
Māori and Pacific peoples' over-representation in the criminal justice system
13 The Māori incarceration rate is a major contributor to the size of New Zealand's prison population. The imprisonment rate for Māori was about 440 per 100,000 of the population in 2003, whereas for non-Māori it was 80.[1] Māori children and young people aged less than 17 years constitute 24 percent of the NZ population, but 49 percent of youth justice service clients are Māori.
14 Disparities are particularly striking when scaled by the size of different ethnic populations:
Ethnic disparities from apprehension to prison, 2003: rates per 100,000
|
European |
Māori |
Pacific |
Total NZ |
|
|
Police apprehensions |
3,500 |
15,500 |
6,600 |
5,300 |
|
Police prosecutions |
2,000 |
9,700 |
4,000 |
3,200 |
|
Remand in prison |
10 |
110 |
40 |
30 |
|
Convictions |
1,400 |
6,300 |
2,700 |
2,400 |
|
Custodial sentence |
110 |
770 |
250 |
210 |
|
Sentenced in prison |
70 |
440 |
220 |
130 |
Data are expressed per 100,000 of estimated ethnic populations, and have been rounded.
15 To an extent these results reflect the younger demographics of Māori and Pacific peoples, in conjunction with the young age of most criminal offenders and prisoners. Even allowing for this factor, however, the discrepancies are still very large, and have serious implications for the future of Māori and Pacific peoples' communities.
16 Data on prisoners released in 2002-04 show that Māori were more likely (than any other large ethnic group) to be reconvicted within one and two years after release, while Pacific peoples had lower reconviction rates than Europeans.
17 At the same time, Māori are disproportionately victims of crime. Māori are considerably more likely to have been a victim of violent offending than non-Māori. According to the 2001 National Victimisation Survey, Māori females were victims of twice as many crimes as European females and were twice as likely to have experienced acts or threats of violence from a partner. Māori males were the victim of 85 percent more crimes than European males.
Reasons for over-representation
The root causes of Māori over-representation in the criminal justice system appear to be centred on socio-economic factors rather than ethnicity. Being Māori does not make a person an offender; however, a significant number of Māori experience risk factors that contribute to criminal behaviour. These include:
- having few social ties or mixing with anti-social peers;
- family breakdown;
- poor self management, aggressiveness, performing and attending poorly at school;
- experiencing higher rates of unemployment, or being predominantly employed in low skill and low income jobs;
- demonstrating anti-social and violent attitudes that are supportive of crime;
- drug and alcohol abuse;
- living in overcrowded and/or frequently changing housing, in a neighbourhood that is poor and with high rates of crime and violence; and
- disconnection from cultural institutions such as iwi, hapu and whānau; because of this some Māori do not have a clear sense of cultural identity.
19 These risk factors are often clustered and of high incidence in Māori communities. Even though they lie outside the criminal justice sector, understanding these broader social inequities and economic conditions is important for understanding the drivers of the Māori imprisonment rate.
20 While Pacific peoples' over-representation in the criminal justice system is not as large, it appears to be centered on similar socio-economic factors, such as:
- a lack of understanding of Pacific culture and language, leading to a loss of identity and isolation from community support;
- family breakdown as a result of poor parent/child relationships, low educational achievement and unemployment, leading to alcohol and drug abuse and family violence; and
- Pacific immigrants facing new environments, lack of support, and language barriers.
Implications of the other proposals
21 The proposals in this suite of papers apply to all New Zealanders, regardless of ethnicity. While they can be expected to reduce the absolute number of Māori and Pacific peoples in prison, they will not of themselves reduce the proportion of prisoners who are Māori or Pacific peoples.22The following table presents a synopsis of comments in other papers on their implications for Māori and Pacific peoples:
|
Paper |
Comment |
|
Crime prevention |
The proposals to address the underlying causes of crime through primary, secondary and tertiary interventions, offer long-term potential for reducing disparities, such as over-representation of Māori and Pacific peoples in the criminal justice system. It should be noted that Māori and Pacific peoples are more likely than other ethnic groups to experience the risk factors that contribute to criminal offending. |
|
Custodial remand |
It is important to clarify whether there is an unmet need around access to support services for those seeking bail, particularly Māori and Pacific peoples. |
|
Restorative justice |
Māori offenders' participation in diversion-related restorative justice can reduce the likelihood of convictions for further offences and can reduce the seriousness of subsequent offending. It can help identify wrap-around services to help Māori offenders address the causes of their offending. |
|
Community sentences |
An increased use of community-based sentences for Māori and Pacific peoples would depend in large part on judicial willingness to make use of these options. Any judicial concerns need to be addressed. |
|
Home detention |
On past patterns, Māori may qualify less often for the increased use of home detention. They also may breach home detention conditions more frequently and end up serving a term of imprisonment. Both need to be investigated. |
|
Preventing re-offending |
Programmes need to involve Māori in their development and delivery, and be effective in engaging Māori offenders by recognising their specific cultural needs. For intensive programmes this requires an expert understanding of tikanga, whakapapa, and te reo, and contact with appropriate whānau and marae. Similar issues apply to effective programmes for Pacific peoples. |
23These implications will be addressed in the follow-up to this package. They also raise general issues that are addressed below.
The way ahead
24 Officials have arrived at the following conclusions on Māori and Pacific peoples' offending and imprisonment:- High rates of offending by, and imprisonment of, Māori, and high levels of victimisation, involve large social costs in terms of detrimental impacts on the well being of Māori families and communities. They also involve large fiscal costs throughout the criminal justice system. The same holds true for Pacific peoples, though to a lesser extent.
- The root causes of the rate of Māori and Pacific peoples' offending and imprisonment appear to be centred in socio-economic risk factors rather than ethnicity. However, there may be systemic bias within the criminal justice sector (i.e. unintended consequences of discretion at various stages in the criminal justice system and unevenness of decision making).
- Across New Zealand, and at different stages of the criminal justice system, there are programmes that are said to be effective or show promise (see examples in Appendices A and B). Considerable practitioner expertise and volunteer effort has developed in agencies and in community-based service deliverers. Success is often dependent on individuals rather than structures and systems, and is not easily replicable.
- Officials have not identified new initiatives specific to Māori and Pacific peoples that would reliably and sustainably affect their offending. The proposals for addressing persistent or prolific offending (Paper Two), while drawing on an initiative stemming from Police's Māori Responsiveness Strategy, will apply to all offenders.
- There is evidence of agency disconnection and fragmentation in implementing programmes and in supporting local initiatives. Agencies vary in their ability to understand and respond to Māori and Pacific peoples' issues. Pockets of expertise and practice need to be brought together across the sector to inform policy responses. This should be complementary to the two themes "Developing Māori Potential" and "Developing Pacific Prosperity".
- Agency experience is that the formation of trust and confidence relationships with Māori is critical to success. Implicit in that process is a level of internal capability and infrastructure, sufficient to engage and establish working and practical relationships with Māori. None of this is achieved overnight and requires significant commitment and investment to remain effective.
25 All in all, the criminal justice system needs to do far better at stemming the entry of Māori and Pacific peoples, and managing their exit. Issues that need to be addressed include:
- How the Government can best support Māori and Pacific peoples' communities to reduce victimisation, offending and re-offending, and improve responsiveness to programmes developed by Māori and Pacific peoples' communities.
- How the Government can best support families/whānau of offenders that are involved in remand/bail, restorative justice and family group conferences, home detention, and prisoner re-integration.
- How to remove opportunities for systemic bias, thereby ensuring consistency and fairness for Māori and Pacific peoples at all points in the criminal justice system where there is an element of discretion.
26 These tasks cannot be accomplished by the Government alone. There is an important role for Māori and Pacific peoples' providers of support, rehabilitation, re-integration, restorative justice and other programmes. They also require sustained efforts by these communities, in general and regarding individual victims, offenders, and at-risk youth.
"How can this work for Māori and Pacific peoples?"
27 The proposals in this suite of papers have been developed to slow the growth of the prison population, and centre on changes to legislation and policy that will apply to all New Zealanders. It is difficult to effect differential impacts on different groups. Nevertheless, an appropriate goal should be that the initiatives best contribute to reducing Māori and Pacific peoples' offending, re-offending and imprisonment rates.
28 An integral part of the implementation phase should be to answer the question "How can this work for Māori and Pacific peoples?" As noted in the other papers, and as summarised in the table above, answers need to be sought on a range of different measures.
29 This will be an important task for the reporting and governance arrangements that are proposed (see Paper One) for maintaining the momentum of the work reflected in this suite of papers and managing resources effectively. These arrangements include governance roles for Te Puni Kōkiri and the Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs, and quarterly reports to Ministers.
30 It is proposed that the initial focus of ongoing work, given capacity and capability constraints, and the magnitude of over-representation, be on Māori, with subsequent work on Pacific peoples.31 The implementation phase should include consultation with Māori and Pacific peoples' practitioners and providers (and, where appropriate, offenders), addressing in particular:
- practical initiatives that are addressing or can address Māori and Pacific peoples at risk in the criminal justice system;
- provider and community potential and capability;
- gaps in service provision; and
- the co-ordination of agency effort and their interface with community groups and tribal structures.
32 In addition, forthcoming consultations with Māori judges of the District Court will seek their views on how the package can best reduce Māori offending, re-offending and imprisonment rates.
33 It is recommended that officials report back to Ministers on findings, implications, and actions to be taken relating to Māori by s.9(2)(f)(iv), with an interim report to Ministers by s.9(2)(f)(iv). It is also recommended that officials provide a similar report back to Ministers on Pacific peoples by s.9(2)(f)(iv).
Unintended consequences of discretion in the criminal justice system
34 The preparation of the proposals in this package, in particular as they affect Māori and Pacific peoples, has raised the possibility of systemic bias within the criminal justice sector; that is, unintended consequences of discretion at various stages in the criminal justice system and unevenness of decision making.35 It has not been possible to clarify the nature or magnitude of any unintended consequences or unevenness. These matters need to be investigated further. Officials will report back by s.9(2)(f)(iv) on:
- an overview of the likely nature and magnitude of any unintended consequences of discretion at various levels in the criminal justice system and unevenness of decision making, and their implications for consistency and fairness for Māori and Pacific peoples; and
- a recommended programme of work that addresses any issues arising out of the overview, where it has been found that there are unintended consequences that have resulted in implications for consistency and fairness for Māori and Pacific peoples, including resource and scope issues associated with such a proposed programme of work.
Justice sector Managing for Outcomes framework
36 The justice sector's Managing for Outcomes framework can be a useful vehicle for leveraging agency responses to the objective of reducing Māori and Pacific peoples' offending, imprisonment and victimisation. The Ministry of Justice is currently reviewing the framework ready for reporting to Ministers by August. It is important that a revised sector framework provides a solid outcomes-directed and accountable platform for agencies to progress.
37 The framework will provide a context for analysing Māori and Pacific peoples' offending, imprisonment and victimisation. This is particularly relevant in relation to sector and agency development of a sound empirical basis for policy development, through data collection, research and analysis, and monitoring and evaluation of sector and agency policies, initiatives and programmes. Strong intervention logic will need to be a feature of this activity.
38 The "Developing Māori Potential" approach (of building on the success and strength of Māori, s.9(2)(f)(iv) will be factored into the outcomes framework for reviewing the success of the proposed interventions.
Recommendations
39 It is recommended that the Cabinet Policy Committee:
1 agree that the implementation phase of the initiatives proposed in this package address how they can best contribute to reducing Māori and Pacific peoples' offending, re-offending and imprisonment rates;2 direct Te Puni Kōkiri and the Ministry of Justice (joint lead) and the Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs to:
2.1 engage with Māori and Pacific peoples' practitioners, providers and offenders on: practical initiatives to address Māori and Pacific people at risk in the criminal justice system; provider and community capacity and development; gaps in service provision; and co-ordination of agency efforts;
2.2 identify and mobilise the skills, experience and competency necessary to better inform the sectoral response to Māori and Pacific peoples offending;
2.3 seek advice from Māori and Pacific advisors within justice sector agencies;
2.4 investigate the establishment of a fund, to be administered by the governance group, to support practical initiatives that emerge from the engagement with Māori and Pacific peoples' practitioners, providers and offenders;
2.5 develop an empirical evidence base about practical initiatives, including those developed within the fund and initiatives designed, developed and undertaken by Māori and Pacific communities, to inform an understanding about what works and why;
2.6 report back to Ministers with a programme of action relating to Māori by s.9(2)(f)(iv) (with an interim report back by s.9(2)(f)(iv)), and to Pacific peoples by s.9(2)(f)(iv);
3 note that forthcoming consultations with Māori judges of the District Court will seek their views on how the package can best contribute to reducing Māori offending, re-offending and imprisonment rates;
4 note that the governance of the implementation phase will include roles for Te Puni Kōkiri and the Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs;
5 direct officials to report back to justice sector Ministers by s.9(2)(f)(iv) with:
5.1 an overview of the likely nature and magnitude of any unintended consequences of discretion at various levels in the criminal justice system and unevenness of decision making, and their implications for consistency and fairness for Māori and Pacific peoples; and
5.2 a recommended programme of work that addresses any issues arising out of the overview, where it has been found that there are unintended consequences that have resulted in implications for consistency and fairness for Māori and Pacific peoples, including resource and scope issues associated with such a proposed programme of work;
6 direct officials to report to Ministers in August, on how the revised outcomes framework for the justice sector will be used by agencies to report on progress on reducing Māori and Pacific peoples' offending.
Hon Mark Burton
Minister of Justice
On behalf of:
Hon Phil Goff, Minister of Pacific Island Affairs
Hon Annette King, Minister of Police
Hon Parekura Horomia, Minister of Māori Affairs
Hon David Benson-Pope, Minister of Social Development and Employment
Hon Damien O'Connor, Minister of Corrections
Footnotes
1 The rates have increased to 568 per 100,000 for Māori, and 98 per 100,000 for non-Māori in 2006.