The Royal Commission on Social Policy’s April Report 30 years on

Introduction.
The scale of the consultation.
The push for early publication.
The long term impact.
Explanation of the layout of the report.
Volume I
Volume II
Volume 3 parts 1 & 2
Volume IV
Appendix 1 Equating Māori and Pākehā values.
The full text of the Royal Commission on Social Policy and link to the table of contents.
List of commissioners, staff and chapter authors.
Commissioners.
Staff of the Royal Commission.
Authors.

Introduction

April 29 2018 was, as well as being the 178th Anniversary of the signing of Te Tiriti by Wellington tribes, also the thirtieth anniversary of the publication of the report of the Royal Commission on Social Policy (Te Komihana a te Karauna mo nga Ahauatanga-A-Iwi). Subtitled the “April Report” it runs to about 4000 A5 pages in 5 pale blue soft-covered volumes.

Links to the full text

Much derided following its publication the work of the Commission could be seen as a sop by the Fourth Labour Government (1984-1990) to those parts of the electorate who were alarmed by the neo-liberalism with its privatisations, market solutions and user-pays approaches.

The report was published in the same year as Professor Marilyn Waring’s Counting for Nothing and had in common with it a concern with the use of GDP as a measure and in addition it contains the first extensive discussions by a government body in NZ of:

The use of well-being as a measure of national progress across domains of society – social, cultural, economic, environmental
The use of indicators across these well-being domains as a better measure of national well-being than GDP.
Ideas related to bringing our highest aspirations about ourselves and the world back into the political process including exploring the spiritual dimensions of social policy.
Aligning Māori and Pākehā concerns which were presented on somewhat of an even footing.
Until then issues little discussed in the government realm such as homosexuality and abortion.

The report also provided lengthy descriptions of the socially progressive thinking which was making its way into broader New Zealand society. There was a chapter on the environment and one on the middle class capture of public services. The commissioners endorsed a world view that there were parallels between Pākehā and Māori values with respect to social well-being. (see appendix 1).

A few of the perspectives presented had begun to adopt the language of markets and neo-liberal ideas but many of the submissions and most of the content ran counter to the adoption of these market fundamentalisms and privatisation of public services and property.

There are papers from experts of the day on how well-being could be demonstrated across a series of sectors – elder care, Māori, women, people with disabilities as well as extensive material on employment, housing, education, health, social programmes, multi-culturalism, feminist issues, the importance of te reo and of te Tiriti as a foundational document for New Zealand.

The scale of the consultation

The brief for the Commission was wide and the scale of consultation unprecedented. The Commission staff are listed in the report, and they numbered more than 60 over the course of the investigation, and hundreds of people were involved in writing the chapters. More than 6000 submissions were received from hundreds of organisations and thousands of individuals and many are available in the National Library’s Turnbull Library. The content of the Commission’s papers are held in files at Archives New Zealand.

The Commission ran two extensive road tours,at which the Commissioner’s received evidence and which read today like Royal Progresses, and held meetings in community centres, council buildings and on Marae.

The Commissioners were Judge Ivor Richardson who was the Chairman supported by

Ann R. Ballin,
Marion E. Bruce
Len Cook
Mason Durie and
Rosslyn Noonan.

The push for early publication

Scheduled to be a two year process, the Commission was due to finish in October 1988, but it reported early and as a consequence the structure of the report is somewhat less well organised than it could have been. A further iteration of consultation was proposed following the release of draft papers but it never took place. Hence recommendations, apart from those in the first section of volume IV, are not collected into one place and are variously described as “proposals”, “the way ahead”, “new policy proposals” and “futures”. There is no index, some chapters are by named authors, others are anonymous and there is no common style or perspective. Even the numbering and use of macrons are inconsistent. (Only when the National Library digitised and aligned it with the electronic text has the content been easy to be searched).

The reasons for the rush to publish are outlined in the text of the April report. It was acknowledged at the outset that the process of government could not be put on ice during the consultation. However the publication date was brought forward when the Labour Government, was perceived by the Chair, to have hi-jacked the process. The section in volume 1 which contained a sequential outline of the work of the Commission said.

On 17 December, the Government released a major ‘economic package’ which included explicit statements of policy affecting taxation, income maintenance, and superannuation, and had major implications for other areas of social policy. The Commission had examined the Income Maintenance and Taxation phase of its work programme only a week before, with a view to releasing working drafts of its materials and conclusions in February 1988. The Commission’s Chairman immediately issued a press statement expressing his concern ‘at the impact on the Royal Commission of the major and wide-ranging decisions shaping social policy’ which had been announced, and indicating that the decisions ‘will inevitably be seen as substantially pre-empting work of the Commission in the crucial areas of income maintenance and taxation and significantly affecting other areas of our inquiry’.

In January 1988 it was decided to rush urgently towards publication in April with the possibility of the release of other papers both before and afterwards. The Commissioners reported when announcing the intention to present an early report,

“that the analysis was limited and we have not had the advantage of presenting working papers for comment and discussion as a step in the process of developing the report”.

There were other problems –

In early December (1987) [Christchurch newspaper] The Press had contained reports of the establishment by the Social Equity Committee of Cabinet of 17 ‘task forces’ to enquire into a wide range of social policy matters.

The concerns were somewhat mitigated when the media reports were clarified by the Minister.

The Chairman of the Social Equity Committee, The Right Hon Geoffrey Palmer, called on the Commissioners and explained that his Committee did indeed intend to set up working parties of officials (not task forces) but its programme was a three-year one, and no conclusions would be reached on any of the social policy matters before it without first seeking the views of the Royal Commission

The long term impact

Few direct impacts flowed from publication but a 2008 report says the Commission:

broadened what issues could be considered as social policy as well as influencing the development of later, more holistic, approaches to social policy. For example, the first Social Report, produced in 2001 (Ministry of Social Development 2001), recognised the importance of the Royal Commission’s work in contributing to debates on the quality of life in this country.

Later the 2002 Local Government Act contained the opportunity for councils to act to provide services that delivered against well-being across the four domains of economic, culture, social and environmental policy and signs are that these are to be reintroduced in 2018. The whole endeavour was opposed by the NZ Treasury (which is ironic given that it is now Treasury that is leading the work on the Living Standards Framework) and thirty years later the new government also has a focus on well-being and it’s measurement, the use of other indicators than GDP and a “fairer and more caring society.” It is this renewed focus on well-being that makes the Royal Commission’s 30 year old deliberations of relevance to today’s political debates.

Explanation of the layout of the report

A full table of contents is linked here.

(text adapted from the preface to volume 1)

Volume I

New Zealand Today contains:

Social Policy in New Zealand: An Historical Overview, by Professor W. H. Oliver;
The People of New Zealand, a demographic profile prepared by the Department of Statistics;
The Voice of the People: An Analysis of nearly 6000 Submissions;
Attitudes and Values: A New Zealand Survey, a report on the extensive attitudinal survey carried out for the Commission by the Department of Statistics to complement the submission material;
A Chronological Narrative of the Inquiry.

Volume II is titled Future Directions.

It discusses in fairly extensive overview chapters the broad areas around which the work of the Royal Commission was organised. As explained in the introductory chapter, the first 6 broad areas:

Standards and Foundations which is addressed in the introduction,
The Treaty of Waitangi:
Directions for Social Policy,
Women and Social Policy,
The Inter-relationship of Economic and Social Policy,
Social Wellbeing, and Work.

These approach in different ways and with different emphases the features of today’s society which we consider should govern social policy.

There are 5 further overviews in the volume.

Outcomes of Social and Economic Processes,
Funding, Income Maintenance and Taxation,
Social Provision:
Access and Delivery and Policy Development,
Assessment and Monitoring

These papers raise questions of principle of wide general application. It has seemed sensible to adopt this approach rather than to go directly to particular functional areas such as health, education or housing, or to specific perspectives on social policy such as those of the elderly, the young, the disabled, or ethnic minorities.

Volume 3 parts 1 & 2

Supporting papers relating directly to the overview papers in Volume II are included in the two volumes of Volume III, called Future Directions: Associated Papers, and follow the same subject sequence.

Volume IV,

called Social Perspectives, contains position papers prepared for the Commission on functional areas and special perspectives by writers with special expertise in the particular subjects.

They draw on the submissions and other work of the Commission and each was prepared in consultation with the Commissioner having responsibility for that subject area. The short overview that precedes the position papers expresses certain conclusions which the Commissioners have reached within the substantial time constraints.

Appendix 1 Equating Māori and Pākehā values

The Māori concepts are

Four cornerstones are identified:

Te Ao Turoa (the environment);

Whanaungatanga (the bonds of kinship);

Taonga tuku iho (cultural heritage); and

Turangawaewae (a place of security).

Elaboration of these concepts clarifies the interrelationship between physical, human, spiritual and cultural dimensions and their need to be viewed together when social policy is considered.

These are compared to Western concepts to find some parallels. Only the fifth point, revealing the creeping impact of financialised thinking could not be aligned with the Māori values. One can only wonder whether a tortuous debate was needed to arrived at the final wording!

1. The objective of all social policy is to create the conditions necessary for human wellbeing and the achievement of potential.

2. All individual human persons are of intrinsic moral worth; this worth is not derived from personal ability, merit or contribution to society, but is derived simply from their moral status as persons.

3. All persons have interests which provide the basis for an equal claim to consideration, and all persons are worthy of respect in some fundamental, or residual sense, irrespective of differences in respect based on merit or desert.

4. Human beings are social beings; and can only realise their nature, or individual potential, in a community.

5. Human wants are in principle unlimited, and resources limited. In any society which permits freedom of choice, scarce resources must be allocated between conflicting claims in a way that is fair and just, as well as efficient. Justice is a moral requirement that all organisations and institutions should meet. At a pragmatic level, social stability depends on individual differences in material conditions being recognised as just.

The full text of the Royal Commission on Social Policy and link to the table of contents

The content is held at the National Library. The giant PDFs can be downloaded to a PC or device PC and can then be searched. The National Library catalogue notes that there is ‘no known copyright’.

Lots of additional material is available at Archives New Zealand and in the National Library

List of commissioners, staff and chapter authors

Staff of the Royal Commission

Maxine Barrett
Jugadish Guria
Line Ostler
Joanna Beresford
Trish Hall
Judith Owen
Marianne Bray
Anne Harre
Elizabeth Popplewell
Adele Carpinter
Jim Haugh
Christine Cheyne
Te Aroha Henare
John Rawcliffe
Sandy Clinton
Katie Hennah
Linda Reeves
Len Cook
Joy Hippolite
Wilma Rennie
Jackie Cumming
Julia Humphries
Ann Reweti
Bunt Dasent
Justin Hurrelle
Charles Royal
Te Aue Davis
Lyn Jowett
Tania Samphier
Melissa de Souza Correa
Maree Judson
Dean Stanley
Rahui Katene
Jeanette Sertsou
Shaun Devoy
Robyn Keay
Thakor Valabh
Sylvia Dixon
Graham Barkus
Vince Galvin
Des O’Dea
Grant McAuliffe
Graham Wilson
Ted Douglas
Janet McCallum
Colleen Wineera
Juliet Elworthy
Penny McKay
Clare Wooding
Penny Fenwick
Robin McKinlay
Sandra Young
Ruth Ferris
Patrick Morgan
John Gallacher
Donnella Moss

Authors

W. H. Oliver
Mānuka Henare
Maxine Barrett
Christine Cheyne
C. T. Dyall
M. Keith
Margy-Jean Malcolm
Janet McCallum
Catherine Benland
J. Blaszcyk
Robin McKinlay
Kuni Jenkins
Deborah Mabbett
David H Thorns
Sophie Watson
Richard Benton
Michael Peters
James Marshall
Grant McAuliffe
Whatarangia Winiata
Vince Galvin
Penny Fennwick
Sir Ivor Richardson
Judith Reinken
Wally Penetito
Cathy Wylie
Campbell Roberts
Warren Young
Caroline Bridge
Cody John
Molly Melhuish
Geoff Bertram
Christine Dann
Raewyn Good
John Farnsworth
Derek Tini Fox
Grant Cushman
Allan Laidler
Justin Hurrelle
Finau Kolo
Kiwi Tamasese,
Paula Masoe-Clifford,
Sui Ne’emia Garwood
Marg Gilling
Peggy G Koopman-Boyden
Robyn Hunt
Peter Benge
Mānuka Henare
Edward Douglas
Department of Statistics
Ministry of Women’s Affairs