8. KATHERINE RICH (National) Link to this
to the Minister of Education
If the ministry from this point has serious allegations of sexual abuse brought to its attention by a school seeking advice on what to do, will the ministry in future advise that school to take such concerns to the police, or does he agree with the statement made on his behalf that “That is outrageous.”?
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Education) Link to this
The 1996 Breaking the Cycle: Interagency Protocols for Child Abuse Management, which I tabled in this House last week, provides guidance to schools on how to handle allegations of this nature. In the case of Hato Pāora College, which we discussed last week, the school did not seek advice from the Ministry of Education on how it should conduct the investigation it undertook into allegations made against the principal. It did, however, promptly report its investigation to Child, Youth and Family, which in turn reported it to the police as the protocols require. The Ministry of Education was also first made aware of the allegations at that time.
Why will the Minister not spell out to his ministry that in the event that a staff member hears of serious allegations of sexual abuse made against a school’s principal, the staff member is to advise the school to take those allegations directly to the police as soon as possible, and in the event that that does not happen then alert the police himself or herself?
Schools are required to alert Child, Youth and Family, which is then required under the protocol to alert the police. I appreciate that the member is concerned that we have to deal with this matter in a very effective and speedy way. In the case that was raised last week, that happened. These are very serious allegations. We want the safety of children to be uppermost—the first thing that happens. We have got protocols. I want to assure the member they are working.
When the Government expects other Kiwis to alert the authorities about allegations of sexual abuse immediately, and even to pick up the phone if they see a child being smacked in the supermarket, why is the Minister adamant that it is not the role of his ministry to check that cases that come to its attention are directed to the police immediately?
The member seems to be hearing, but not listening. There is a protocol in place that says that Child, Youth and Family must be notified instantly, and it must notify the police. The process is there and it happened.
Why does the Minister stick to the position that the board and the ministry have acted utterly appropriately and followed the appropriate steps, when staff loyal to the principal, who were untrained and ill-equipped to carry out sexual abuse interviews, videotaped interviews of boys, potentially tainting evidence before the police and Child, Youth and Family were alerted and involved in the investigation, when they are the authorities that have the skills and abilities to carry out those kinds of detailed investigations?
It is very easy to make allegations in this Chamber about a process followed in a case that is now before the courts. I am advised that the police have looked into the investigation by the Hato Pāora College board, and that they believe that the investigation was transparent and thorough. We have had that assurance from the police, and they believe that the board could not have made any other decision. I repeat that the board could not have made any other decision, based on the allegations that it had before it. New evidence—not available to the board at that time—was brought forward in October, and that enabled the police to reach a different conclusion.
Does the Minister accept that the investigation at the Feilding school is not an investigation of smoking behind the bike sheds but is an investigation of very serious allegations of sexual abuse, and one that requires training, understanding, and knowledge of interviewing; and does he accept that in this instance the ministry should have advised the school to take those allegations directly to the police and not relied on the police finding out from the media?
Once again, the member is repeating things in this Chamber that are simply not true. The police did not find out from the media; they found out from Child, Youth and Family. The member knows that, because I telephoned her on Thursday after question time. I wanted to talk to her to make sure that she understood what had happened. I am concerned about the effect that all of this is having on that school, on the parents, and on the pupils. This is a very serious matter. The school followed the appropriate protocols: it notified Child, Youth and Family, which notified the police. That is how the police found out. They did not find out from the local newspaper. They found out from Child, Youth and Family, which is required to notify them.
Hon Mark BurtonAs the member seems to have difficulty with this issue, can the Minister once more outline precisely the protocol that the school and the police are required to follow, and confirm that the protocol was indeed followed on this occasion?
The Ministry of Education requires all schools to have policies in place to ensure the safety and well-being of all students. When complaints are made about staff, schools are also required to conduct a fair employment investigation, and schools would be advised to seek professional advice—as, indeed, Hato Pāora College did. Schools are required to report their findings to the police or to Child, Youth and Family, which Hato Pāora College did. Notwithstanding that a complaint could have been made directly to the police—of course, those complaining could have gone to the police themselves; they did not—the complainants went to the school. The school did all the things it was supposed to do. I remind the House that the school notified Child, Youth and Family, which notified the police. That is how the police found out.