11. TARIANA TURIA (Co-Leader—Māori Party) Link to this
to the Minister of Health
Why, following the giving of “clear directions”, will the Ministry of Health “no longer make direct references to the Treaty of Waitangi or its principles in new policy, action plans or contracts”, and what is the basis for those directions?
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Health) Link to this
The Treaty of Waitangi is specifically recognised in the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Act 2000, and is given effect to by ensuring that Māori are represented on district health boards. It is also recognised in key health strategies, including He Korowai Oranga. However, strategies must be operationalised, which is why the district health boards are instructed to identify the specific actions that they are taking to improve Māori health and reduce inequalities.
Does the Minister recall his response on 20 June 2006 to my question regarding the removal of reference to the Treaty from health specifications that “there have been no instructions, and there are no plans to issue instructions.”, and what happened between June and December last year to make him change his mind?
What has happened is that the principles have been placed in some contract documentation—there are a bit over 16,000 contracts within the health sector. When a provider is asked what it is doing for Māori, the answer sometimes is that it is following Treaty principles. Well, that will not do. At the operational level we want to see delivery to Māori, not an assertion that principles are being followed. In other words, we want to shift from high-level direction only, to having runs on the board. The principles themselves—I say to the member—have a rightful place, which is in the legislation. They are there, this Government put them there, they are staying there, and they are going nowhere.
Pita ParaoneTēnā koe, Madam Speaker. Does the Minister agree that among the reasons that the Ministry of Health is moving away from direct reference to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi is that those principles were never included in the Treaty itself, and are undefined and ambiguous, and that, with 21 district health boards, that leads to 21 different interpretations of those so-called principles; if not, why not?
In my view, the stronger argument is that if the Treaty and the principles surrounding it are to be found in Government documentation, they should be found at the statutory level, not at a commercial contracting level.
Te Ururoa Flavell Link to this
Kia ora, Madam Speaker; kia ora tātou katoa. Is the Minister aware of the recent statement from the chief executive of the Ministry of Education that removing the Treaty of Waitangi from the school curriculum was a blunder, and is he prepared to learn from that mistake and admit that removing reference to the Treaty from the top end of the health sector policy line is also a gigantic blunder; if not, why not?
Because there is a significant difference between a school curriculum and a series of commercial contracts.
Does the Minister agree with the statement of his predecessor, the Hon Annette King, that the “omission of any reference to the Treaty would be interpreted by Maori as indicative of a less than whole-hearted commitment to the principle of partnership and as such could be seen to be making a negative contribution to Maori health and well being.”; if not, why not?
I do agree with my predecessor, which is why, in the case of the health system, the Treaty is reflected in representation of Māori on all district health boards and, by supposition, on a number of the district health board committees that service those health boards. That is the partnership that the member speaks of, and that is the partnership that I am very comfortable with; it is in place and it is working. That does not mean that a high-level idea, such as the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, is well placed in some thousands of commercial contracts.