Chapter 7: Key findings on Whakapakari

303. The Inquiry finds:

Circumstances that led to individuals being taken or placed into care

Most young people were placed at Te Whakapakari Youth Programme as an outcome of youth justice charges. The intention of the programme was to punish and reform.
As a third-party provider of care approved by the Department of Social Welfare and its successors[466],Te Whakapakari Youth Programme was also available as a placement option for children as young as 12 years old under care and protection orders. Many children and young people in need of care and protection were placed there between 1989 and 1998, particularly those considered “troubled teens”, or those with drug and alcohol problems, neurodiversity or trauma, who were difficult to place.
It was inappropriate to place children and young people who required care and protection at Te Whakapakari Youth Programme with those who were placed as an outcome of youth justice charges.
Te Whakapakari Youth Programme was particularly unsuitable for girls and for neurodiverse children and young people.
From 1998 the State prioritised youth justice placements. It was the only national programme available to judges of the Youth Court and was in constant demand, despite the pervasive abuse. From that time care and protection placements of young people with psychiatric and psychological conditions or severe emotional distress were discouraged but not banned, and still occurred.
Te Whakapakari Youth Programme was seen as a place of last resort for troubled teens, or to provide respite for those working with them, including NZ Police and social workers.
The State failed to:

a. engage with and properly support hāpori and whānau Māori to care for their own; and
b. ensure that there were alternative kaupapa Māori programmes for tamariki and rangatahi Māori to support their rehabilitation needs in the youth justice system.

Nature and extent of abuse and neglect

Whakapakari was a terrifying environment from which there was no escape. Survivors suffered pervasive extreme abuse and neglect in every form.
Children and young people experienced severe physical abuse including with weapons, which was routinely inflicted and encouraged by John da Silva, supervisors, other staff and in some instances by their peers.
Staff encouraged violence between young people by setting up group fights, and created the “Flying Squad”, a group of young people given status above others and used to inflict violence on other boys as a punishment. Some young people who were part of the Flying Squad felt uncomfortable at what they were required to do and sometimes pretended to hit other young people.
Sexual abuse was also pervasive. Children and young people were subjected to sexual assaults by staff and some peers including by rape and insertion of broom handles or wooden sticks into boys’ anuses. Group sexual assaults including rape by older boys on younger people occurred, sometimes organised and watched by staff.
Supervisors were armed with guns which they used to manage behaviour. Staff sometimes committed sexual assaults on children and young people at gunpoint and used guns to threaten and coerce them to engage in or submit to sexual activity with others.
Staff threatened young people with death during mock executions where survivors were forced at gunpoint to dig their own graves and lie in them. This was an extreme form of psychological abuse that contributed to the culture of violence and fear.
Children and young people experienced extreme physical exercise and solitary confinement as a punishment. One survivor was locked in a cage overnight. Children and young people were sent alone to Whangara Island, known as Alcatraz, for days as punishment with little or no food and no shelter. At times they were made to swim in shark infested waters around Whangara Island as an additional punishment.
While the programme incorporated some aspects of tikanga and matauranga Māori, the violence and abuse inflicted on tamariki and rangatahi Māori was inconsistent with an ao Māori view and was culturally abusive.
Children and young people were strip-searched on arrival and staff inspected their genitals and buttocks. This practice was degrading, abusive and not permitted to occur.
Children and young people were verbally taunted in insulting, abusive and racist ways by staff.
The food provided to children and young people was inadequate. Survivors were constantly hungry, particularly if they did not successfully catch their own food.
The physical environment was unhygienic and substandard. Survivors lived in tents, which provided inadequate shelter. Bedding was damp and some children and young people did not have sufficient clothing or footwear. There were very limited opportunities to shower, bathe or wash clothing.
There was inadequate medical attention. Some children and young people suffered burns, lost teeth, broken bones, and developed sepsis but were not seen by any health professional.
Children and young people were denied access to education at Whakapakari.

Impacts of abuse and neglect

The abuse and neglect at Te Whakapakari Youth Programme harmed survivors’ physical and mental health, their psychological, emotional, cultural and spiritual wellbeing, and their educational and economic prospects.
Survivors experienced severe physical and emotional suffering. Most have an enduring deep distrust of the State.
Many survivors suffer from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, nightmares and fear of encountering their abusers. Many have experienced depression and suicidal ideation. Some have spent time in psychiatric care. Some have died by suicide.
Survivors were disconnected from their whānau, families, hapū, iwi and communities in every respect, and as a result of the abuse and neglect have struggled to reconnect. For Māori survivors this was a transgression against their whakapapa.
The impact for some Māori survivors of being abused in a purported kaupapa Māori programme diminished their mana and increased their cultural disconnection.
Every survivor who spoke to the Inquiry has been in prison at some point in their life. Like most social welfare residential care, Te Whakapakari Youth Programme did not rehabilitate or reform young offenders but was a pathway to future addictions, crime and imprisonment.
Whakapakari survivors have convictions for the full range of crimes, including murder and manslaughter, very serious violent offending, sexual offending, firearms and drug offending.
Many survivors had issues with drug and alcohol use, and many committed offences in relation to their drug addiction.
Many survivors described difficulty with intimate relationships because of sexual abuse they suffered at Whakapakari. Some survivors admitted being violent to their partners. Some survivors were, or continue to be, estranged from their children.
Many survivors did not receive adequate or any education at Whakapakari and had reduced employment and career opportunities as adults.
The harm to survivors has been transferred over generations.

Factors that caused or contributed to abuse and neglect

The following personal factors caused or contributed to abuse and neglect at Whakapakari:
1. Abuse of children and young people was carried out by the founder John da Silva, supervisors, volunteers and staff, and in some instances, other young people.
  
  b. John da Silva and abusers who were supervisors and staff misused their positions of power and control over children and young people who could not escape.
  
  c. Staff and bystanders who were aware of abuse and neglect failed to intervene to stop it or to make a complaint.
The following institutional factors caused or contributed to abuse and neglect at Whakapakari:
2. a. The complete geographical and psychological isolation of children and young people from whānau, support networks, social workers, communities and society made them vulnerable to abuse and neglect.
  
  b. The environment which permitted abuse to occur was not kaupapa Māori. It placed tamariki and rangatahi Māori at risk and disconnected them from whānau, hapū and iwi, making them more vulnerable to abuse and neglect.
  
  c. Social workers breached Department of Social Welfare requirements to visit children and young people placed there under care and protection orders due to the isolation of the programme. This lack of oversight put these children and young people at significant risk and was a barrier to them making complaints.
3. d. Only a small number of girls and young women were placed at Whakapakari, sometimes as the only female on the programme. This isolation contributed to the risk they would experience sexual and physical abuse from male peers and from staff.
4. e. There was no process for children and young people to make complaints. Many who did attempt to disclose abuse and neglect were threatened and beaten.

The following structural, systemic, and practical factors caused or contributed to abuse and neglect at Whakapakari:
1. Many of the legal safeguards for children and young people in social welfare care did not apply to any third-party provider of care such as Te Whakapakari Youth Trust
  
  b. Te Whakapakari Youth Programme was a boot camp that entrenched violent and anti-social attitudes and behaviours in the children and young people who were sent there.
  
  c. The Department of Social Welfare and its successors:
  
  i. should not have approved Te Whakapakari Youth Trust as a provider as its programme failed to meet many of the legal purposes of social welfare care.
  ii. had no policy for admission to the programme until 1998.
  iii. had inadequate standards for third party providers to meet to receive State funding.
  iv. failed to properly consider the suitability of the programme as a Child and Family Support Service for children and young people under care and protection orders.
  v. was wrong to place children and young people in its care at Te Whakapakari Youth Programme together with young people who had committed criminal offences and were referred by the Youth Court.
  vi. failed to ensure it had cultural capability and robust standards for assessing whether the programme complied with te Tiriti obligations and tikanga Māori.
  
  d. There were serious monitoring failures by the Department of Social Welfare and its successors which:
  
  i. failed to oversee the delivery of Te Whakapakari Youth Programme and to ensure that it protected children and young people from abuse and was culturally appropriate.
  
  ii. failed to take action to prevent abuse and neglect of children and young people at Whakapakari despite receiving reports of bystanders including health workers, NZ Police, and social workers.
  
  iii. failed to act on successive staff and other reports and recommendations from 1989 to 1998.
  
  iv. continued to fund the programme from 1989 despite knowledge of allegations of extreme abuse and neglect, in dereliction of the State’s duty of care.
  
  v. failed to properly investigate and respond to complaints made alleging abuse and neglect and failed on numerous occasions to refer allegations to the NZ Police for investigation.
  
  e. NZ Police:
  
  i. exhibited bias towards survivors who made complaints, treating them as lacking in credibility
  
  ii. failed to properly investigate and respond to many allegations of abuse and neglect it received.
  
  f. The State failed to hold itself as well as abusers to account for extreme abuse and neglect at Te Whakapakari Youth Programme and allowed it to continue.
  
  36. The following societal factors caused or contributed to abuse and neglect at Whakapakari:
  
  a. Negative social attitudes towards children and young people placed at the programme included that they were “tough” and “bad”, required punishment and discipline, and were prone to making false complaints.
  
  b. These negative attitudes and racial discrimination resulted in a resistance by the State to hold itself and offenders to account for abuse and neglect, and young people were simply not believed.

Footnotes

[466] Being the Department of Social Welfare, the Children and Young Persons Service, the Children, Young Persons and Their Families Service, the Children, Young Persons and Their Families Agency and the Child, Youth and Family Service.