Survivors will seek redress from those who are dead, or, who soon will be
New Zealand’s Royal Commission of Inquiry into Historical Abuse in State Care poses unlimited financial liability to public funds.
This is because the historic claims unit which handles compensation claims has been instructed to “cooperate” with, and “support” the Commission.
The historic claims unit is under the umbrella of the Ministry of Social Development.
It is in the business of making what it describes as “payment offers” meaning compensation.
An initial budget of $160 million was initially associated with the Royal Commission.
Now, a year and a half after its inauguration, and at which time its proceedings remain stalled, this is said to have shrunk to half this amount.
It is unclear if this sum is net of estimated compensation payments, or includes them.
When New Zealand’s Labour-led coalition took office it quickly delivered electoral obligations due to certain select constituencies, supporting groups
One of these was to the victim culture swirling around juvenile care and those responsible for administering it, and above all to allow the “survivors” their retributive public voice.
The fact that the Royal Commission scheme was implemented so soon after the arrival of the Labour-led coalition government does indicate though that the previous National government, similarly besieged by the highly organised “survivors,” was doubtful about its unforeseen consequences.
This unlimited liability inherent in the Royal Commission’s procedures has been shrouded in a variety of distractions, notably the sectarian one.
Similarly shrouded is the extent to which the coalition government’s departmental officials, those responsible for estimating things like risk and gross liability, were stampeded by the rush to implement the inquiry.
The Royal Commission’s area of investigation is from 1950 to 2000.
This means it will be reviewing events of 70 years ago.
This in turn means that the “network” as it is often described, of the “survivors” will be seeking redress from those who are dead, or, who soon will be.
Should the accused in loco parentis carers have themselves survived the timescale, many are likely to be of such infirmity as to be unable to defend themselves.
There are many reasons why the watchdogs both within the government, and outside it, notably the press, are silent on this Royal Commission and the unlimited taxpayer liabilities it is likely to set in motion.
The increasing delicacy of it is only one reason.