9 The Deliberations: The Broader Social Policy Dimension
Harnessing Mäori energies to improve opportunities for Mäori has important lessons beyond education. In order to reach the three goals discussed at the February Hui: to live as Mäori, to participate as citizens of the world, to enjoy good health and a high standard of living, it is clear that education will have an important role. But by itself it will have limited impact.
Although this Hui, like the first Hui Taumata Mätauranga, is primarily concerned with education and the education sector it would be short-sighted to talk about an integrated and a responsive sector without also considering greater integration between sectors, especially those such as health, social services, sport and recreation, housing and employment, that make up the raft of social policy concerns. If the recommendations from the February Hui have shown that there is often poor integration of education policies, at least from the whänau perspective, what is even more striking is the lack of integration between the social policy areas and the broader economic goals of the country.
In 1984, and largely because New Zealand was living beyond its means, massive economic reforms were instituted. It was presumed that social benefits would follow. But it is clearer now than it was then that economic policies favouring the free market do not necessarily translate into higher standards of living, better health, or improved educational standards. The message seems to be that unless there is a commitment to pursuing economic and social goals jointly, rather than relying on the elusive trickle down theory, gains in health or education will not be uniform across all sections of society.
No matter how progressive an educational policy, if economic policies and other social policies are not conducive to high educational achievement, there will be limited progress.
The argument is not for re-instating an all-enveloping state welfare system, but for having a more integrated approach to policy development, especially social policy. There are some examples of integrated policy - Family Start, Youth Suicide, whole-of-Government contracting - but for the most part Mäori participation, leaving aside the interventions of Members of Parliament, is focussed on single sectors, and largely on programmes rather than policies. Even those iwi who place great importance on social development, have relationships with the Government to deliver programmes within a policy environment that is essentially driven by a sectoral philosophy.
Working across portfolios, sectors, and ministries, is often considered too complicated to warrant serious effort; hard enough to get one sector right. But Mäori development, whether led by iwi or by urban authorities, is not premised on the sectoral approach and starts with people, their resources, and their multiple aspirations. If there is serious disjunction between policies, results in one area will compromise those in another.
There are two implications from this inter-sectoral approach. First, there is no Mäori group in side or outside government who are seriously addressing the broader issues that relate to positive development across the range of economic and social policies. It is a gap that needs attention.
Second, at the very least the impact of other policies, economic and social, on Mäori education, should form part of the education inquiry. Mäori education impact assessment has not been subjected to any systematic analysis, nor is there an appropriate methodology in place to facilitate it. But in view of the multiple factors that influence success at school, Mäori educational advancement cannot be considered in isolation of other policies and sectors.