Yes, some were harmed but many also thrived
In recent times we have heard the harrowing stories of those who have been abused while in state and faith care over many years. While I understand and empathise with the pain and humiliation they have experienced, I consider there needs to be some balance applied.
My experience only applies to state-based care, as a social worker, supervisor and manager in Child Youth and Family (under its many names) for over 35 years. I saw first hand and heard of many more children and young people’s experience of being in CYF care.
For almost all of those situations, the experience was a positive one. Let’s not forget that these children and young people came from homes where they were seriously abused or neglected — and the necessity for their removal had to be proven in the Family Court under very close scrutiny.
Caregivers (strangers and whanau) generously volunteered to open their homes and their hearts to these children and young people who sometimes had very high needs. The caregivers, social workers and others involved worked hard together to meet the needs of the children under trying circumstances. I was humbled and proud to have worked alongside them.
It’s important that as a country we are made aware of those who were abused while in care, and support them, but let us also remember the very many children and young people for whom being in care was a blessing and helped turn their lives around.
Uplifting material
Rightly or wrongly (as always, a matter of opinion) I was joyously motivated to write having been uplifted by multiple letters to the editor (Kerry Hand, Euan Thomson, Kathleen Moore, Ken Steel, Robyn Vercoe along with Russell Lund’s and Chris Trotter’s opinion piece (all ODT 22.11.24).
There are people about with some great constructive ideas and sound opinions who see the bigger picture after all and are no fools. Where is the same commonsense attitude and foresight amongst our elected members along with many of our people? A few days later I was interested to see Richard Thomson’s letter was printed in full — why should his letter be any different to other contributions from the public with regards to length?
[Mr Thomson was replying in detail to a lengthy opinion article which included comment on him, hence he was granted the space to do so in full. Editor.]
Compare and contrast
Land tenure in Aotearoa is based mainly on the western system of individual ownership of specific parcels of land, defined by cadastral survey. There are large areas of Crown-owned land and also communally owned areas belonging to iwi.
Compare individual title with land that is communally owned. Individual title is designed to ensure exclusive rights to land and property until the owner decided to sell it, or comes to the end of his or her life. Communal property as exemplified by hapu or iwi is quite obviously different.
In the first example the general idea is to reinforce ownership rights about the land and how any "improvements" are carried out. When eventually the tenure changes to a new owner any connection to the former owner also ceases.
In the second example, tribal identity attaches the individual to the whenua in question, in perpetuity. How ironic it is that individual title effectively extinguishes identity, and connections to the land that it was intended to secure and reinforce.
When it comes to stewardship (kaitiakitanga) and environmental protection, to say nothing of a sense of belonging, I know which land tenure system I prefer.
Stacking up containers, not even to the max
The understanding of the public when the decision was made to utilise the harbour area for stacking shipping containers was that the piles would not be more than three containers high but I see we are now up to four layers. Was the promise really just a lie to placate the residents of the West Harbour — who were concerned about the effect on their harbour view, or did someone forget to tell the staff who do the loading?
[Port Otago chief executive Kevin Winders replies: "From a public communication issued in March 2024: ‘The maximum height of stacks is 14.5m (five containers high). While this is well below the maximum permitted height of 20m — and the embankment below SH88 means the bulk of containers will be below road level — containers will be seen from the road."]
People paid for pool so you need to share
I was angered by the article "Diving club cries foul over Moana Pool use" (ODT 20.11.24), in which head coach Connie Deighton criticises the decision to allow aqua joggers "in their landing zone," the new dive pool.
I am currently in my 30th year as a regular user of Moana pool, using it on a near daily basis for well over a decade. Since the new diving pool was built, I have seen various diving coaches come and go and have enjoyed seeing the children develop their diving skills over time, with some of the area next to the diving boards allocated to aqua jogging on some days.
I have seen the number of hours allocated to the dive club increase over the years. The comment by Diving Otakou committee member Jess Luxton: "They didn’t build a diving pool for aqua joggers," rankles as the pool was not specifically built for the dive club either, and that pool has many uses.
Many aqua joggers are elderly and do not cope so well with the vertical ladder steps into the pool, and others require the gradual entry of the pool using the shallow steps that are only available in the new dive pool, because of mobility problems.
Whilst I understand that Diving Otakou would like to do the best for their club members, they need to learn to share.
[Abridged — length. Editor.]
Not on my behalf
Presumably on behalf of all New Zealanders, Prime Minister Luxon recently designated the Lebanese Hizbollah and Yemeni Houthi groups terrorist organisation. This is perhaps because these citizen armies have the temerity to attack Israel in an attempt to stop the genocide it is performing. In siding with Israel and the United States Mr Luxon has made his government tacitly complicit in the genocide and on the wrong side of history. He seems oblivious to the wishes of the large majority of New Zealanders, who find genocide repellent.
Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@odt.co.nz
