Finalmente aparece el intelecto que se concede al hombre terrenal (rigurosamente distinto del alma y, con toda claridad, superior a ella), que

Amohaere explains that from its establishment, the Rūnanga built unique relationships with State sector agencies whereby it succeeded in creating formal affiliations without being bound by the practice regulations of those organisations. She mentions a number of what would be considered ‘mainstream’ organisations that

65 had good training programmes and good reputations with the public. However, some of the programmes or the approach to delivery of the organisations did not fit in with

the Rūnanga’s philosophy,

We were able to be innovative around looking for potential arrangements that enabled us to accrue all the benefits from those arrangements without

actually compromising our mana motuhake as Ngāti Porou...that was our bottom line. Delivering services to our own Ngāti Porou people based on our

Ngāti Porou tikanga, but also knowing that we had the professional people. It was a combination of Ngāti Porou tikanga and mātauranga and any of the

mainstream knowledge, skills, experience that actually ensured we could say we could provide a quality service.

Ngāti Porou was highly ambitious and went so far as to lobby the government of the day in 1996 to create a Vote: Ngāti Porou in the annual budget.

We wanted the government to give us, the Rūnanga [] the social welfare

spend for all those Ngāti Porou people that were in receipt of social welfare,

social services support. They said to us “well that’s interesting but you know the majority of your people live away” and we said “yes” we understood that

but what we would do is we would work with our taura here”...We’d say to

them “ok of the Ngātis living in Auckland and Wellington, who are they going to, to get social services?” and we would then contract with those social service providers to provide services to Ngāti Porou...So we started floating a whole lot of submissions [and] proposals, based on the long term

view of being able to provide services at home but also ensure that the Ngāti Porou living away from home had the same access to a Ngāti Porou

worldview of social service delivery and of social services.

Amohaere also argues that in this respect, Ngāti Porou led the way for other iwi. At one particular iwi leaders hui in 1996, Ngāti Porou leaders had encouraged other iwi

to renegotiate their relationship with the Crown away from a simple funder/provider relationship to one that incorporated their status as a Treaty partner. Amohaere advised that iwi should,

redevelop and renegotiate the way in which the Crown negotiates with

us...it’s just a funder, provider relationship and we’ve got no say around the development of policy [or] the design of the services, we’re at the end of this process...we really wanted iwi social services to go “we’ve got to change that dynamic”, where actually we become much more a part of the decision making and design of social services.

66

Whānau Ora

One point consistently raised, both in this interview and in those with staff, was that

Rūnanga social services have been “doing Whānau Ora” for as long as they have

existed. In terms of the formal social services, Amohaere reflects that,

In all humility, we were way ahead of the pack; like in our vision of what we

could do...we were doing Whānau Ora then in 1996. We didn’t call it Whānau Ora but in 2003 we formally changed the name of what was called

the Ngāti Porou Social Services...we divided it in to two components...Whānau Oranga and Mātauranga Ngāti Porou. We knew that that’s where it was going to be at.

The goal of whānau and community responsibility is one of the fundamentals in the

development of Ngāti Porou Social Services. Amohaere also notes that this is a key

goal of the Whānau Ora concept,

I think it’s a fundamental view of Whānau Ora, that actually we are in the business to make ourselves redundant...we know that we’ve got a lot of whānau that for whatever reasons actually need support to help them to start to get into a better position to take control of their own lives not only control

but take responsibility, but they do need help...we’ve always believed in that

whole strengths based approach so we look for the strengths in whānau and we try to affirm them. We also look for those areas of vulnerability, of weakness and we work with them on that.

Ngāti Porou has a long history of political involvement and social service provision

is no exception. Mana Motuhake Ngāti Porou is one of the cornerstones of the

Rūnanga and this is reflected in its approach to service provision. When discussing the impact of politics on service provision in relation to Whānau Ora, Amohaere

notes,

We were proactive politically at a national level. But the only reason we could be, was because actually we were doing this stuff on the ground...In Gisborne when we first started the Social Services, the Department said to us,

‘we’ve got to have rangatahi services and elderly services’ and we said ‘no actually we’ve got to have whānau services because we can’t compartmentalise our whānau...We knew that from day one...while

everybody else was wanting to set up individual services here or there or start to divide families up and stuff, we resisted...we would not participate in any programmes that actually were premised on the idea that you treated that part

of the whānau in isolation...which is why when Whānau Ora became such a

formal programme it was absolutely natural that we should, it was just an affirmation of a way of working and a belief in the way you worked with

67

More recently, Amohaere has been a part of the Whānau Ora Taskforce in an ex- officio capacity. She makes interesting comments about Whānau Ora being a case of government policy catching up to actual practice but being hailed as a new

innovation. She was interested that much of the conversation surrounding Whānau

Ora seemed to be touting it as a new innovation when in fact she knew that the

Rūnanga and very possibly other iwi organisations had already been practicing the fundamentals of Whānau Ora for many years. She argues that,

Whānau Ora is actually nothing new, our people have always known about Whānau Ora. So ok they might not have called it Whānau Ora, but the fundamental principles of what Whānau Ora is have always been part of our culture. So no I don’t believe it was originated in some Crown agency. Actually I believe it’s been a practice and a way of life that a number of our

whānau have always maintained.

This point gave way to a conversation regarding what makes whānau strong and thus able to provide their own Whānau Ora, looking back to her grandparents’

community on the East Coast, Amohaere says,

What I remember that made those whānau strong is that they knew who they were. So a sense of identity and a sense of belonging is critical to your own sense of self-worth...while they were not materially rich, they never went hungry...They never woke up in the morning and said, ‘I haven’t got any kai

in my cupboard, I’ll go and ask the Department of Social Welfare for a voucher’...Most of them didn’t have any contact whatsoever with any

government agencies so they were much more confident and capable because they had to make decisions for themselves.

Furthermore,

The whole community took responsibility. You belonged to that whole

community, so if you were at the marae and you were Honor’s mokopuna and you were naughty, and Honor wasn’t there, then Apo would be telling you off7...we’ve got to think about what are the values that made us strong and what were the practices? And how we actually incorporate that into

today’s life. Because that’s actually fundamentally what Whānau Ora’s got to

be about.

In terms of finding solutions for the future roll out of Whānau Ora, Amohaere

mentioned the three key areas of State, provider and whānau, and the changes that

she feels need to be made in each of those areas. She argues that the government needs to,

68 look at changing its role, and being less concerned about having to be in control of everything...it just needs to get some smart contracting and

evaluation tools and then with minimal fuss say, ‘right Ngāti Porou or the

Horouta Whanaunga Collective, we want you to work with these 300 whānau

in your rohe, who in our view are some of the most vulnerable whānau. We

want you to work with them and to be able to demonstrate over a period of

time that this is the way in which you can prove their quality of life. We’re

gonna pay you x number of dollars and this is the information in terms of

reporting and accountability that we want...It’s not about bureaucracy. It’s

not about putting certain iwi providers or collectives through all these hoops.

It’s about working with whānau to do some real things and improve their daily lives.

When discussing providers, she notes co-operation and collaboration as important

keys to making Whānau Ora work. In 2012 she attended a meeting with the Horouta

Collective organisations to discuss opportunities in the 2012 budget. When speaking to them she said,

We can’t actually go on our own anymore. We don’t actually have the

numbers to be efficient...We should be playing to our strengths and within our collective who actually has got the best practice and the best track record? And we follow their lead...We also need to be considering how we

share some of our big office services...let’s just find who of us has the best system and why don’t we all just invest in that one? Who’s got the best HR,

recruitment or training programmes?...Let’s use our collective best practice to

ensure that we’ve got a quality of provision across everything we do....we

save ourselves hundreds of thousands of dollars by not having to run our own little systems.

Thirdly, when discussing whānau themselves, who are at the core of Whānau Ora, she mentions,

It’s really around whānau taking responsibility...as a member of this whānau

who is in trouble and needs support; what can I do for myself? What can I do for my kids? What can I do for my husband?...That’s a whānau decision; it’s

not the government’s decision, that’s not Ngāti Porou Hauora’s8

decision...that’s whānau taking responsibility for themselves...the more whānau are in control of their lives and being able to do something

themselves it is more liberating for them than always being dependent on somebody else doing everything for them.

Overall she argues that,

It’s not so much about money and it’s not so much about programmes per se, it’s actually about changing attitudes. It’s about changing the way we behave;

8_{Ngāti Porou Hauora is a primary health organisation that comes under the wider umbrella of Te} Rūnanganui o Ngāti Porou.

69

it’s about being clearer about what everybody’s contribution is to the overall

outcome.

Amohaere’s insights and arguments provide strong support to the conclusion that Whānau Ora is a well-established approach within both Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Porou

and other iwi and Māori organisations. While implementation of the policy programme has not been as swift as anticipated, Whānau Ora could provide some

significant opportunities for developing services that are reflective of local communities, encouraging those communities to be more responsible for the wellbeing of their own members, improving the effectiveness of the Crown – iwi/Crown-Māori relationship and developing more cost effective structures.

70

Chapter Five