The state apologised to abuse-in-care survivors two years ago today. What has changed?

Today marks two years since New Zealand’s government formally apologised to survivors of abuse in out-of-home care.

It came in response to the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care, which exposed decades of systemic abuse and neglect in state and faith-based institutions between 1950 and 1999, affecting some 200,000 people.

In all, the commission made more than 200 recommendations aimed at transforming the care system and providing meaningful redress to survivors.

The apology, delivered in parliament by Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, was accompanied by a commitment to mark the subsequent anniversary as a “Day of Reflection” – assessing what has, and has not, been accomplished for survivors.

Two years on, some important progress has been made. But gaps remain between what the commission recommended and what survivors have received.

A legacy of trauma

The commission’s final report, released in July 2024, made for appalling reading.

Care was under-resourced and poorly monitored, with children subjected to torture at institutions such as Lake Alice Psychiatric Hospital. Māori and Pacific people faced systemic racism, including abuse targeting their ethnicity and separation from their families, language and culture.

For many survivors, the personal and social consequences have been profound. Their experiences resulted in lifelong trauma, poor health, relationship difficulties and poverty.

New Zealand society continues to experience the resulting care-to-crime cycle. Out-of-home care often meant disrupted education, weakened family and community ties and the normalisation of violence. In short, care was criminogenic.

The commission found that up to 80% of current prisoners had spent time in state care. Its report on Hokio Beach School and Kohitere Boys’ Training Centre found vulnerable young people were subjected to abuse and neglect, with little support to address their trauma. Many instead found protection, connection and belonging in gangs.

For many whānau, out-of-home care became an inter-generational cycle, as the children of those impoverished and incarcerated were taken into care in succession.

Progress made, but problems remain

To transform New Zealand’s failing care system, the commission proposed a decade-long shift away from state care towards local, community and hapū-based support, alongside a new puretumu torowhānui (holistic redress) system for survivors.

These reforms were intended to work together. Adequate redress could help survivors rebuild their lives and break inter-generational cycles of care, while a transformed care system would provide better support for those in need.

Encouragingly, the commission’s work has led to some significant improvements.

Survivors now have access to Kōnae, an information clearing house for care records, and the government-funded Survivor Experiences Service. State Redress New Zealand provides a single point of application for compensation, replacing a fragmented process with a common practice framework and more transparent assessment standards.

More funding has been allocated, with average payments rising from around $19,000 to $30,000 and top-ups offered for previously settled claims.

Yet these important gains must be weighed against serious shortcomings with the government’s response.

The government did not adopt the commission’s flagship recommendation to establish an independent redress body. Survivors must instead seek redress from the very institutions responsible for their abuse, which effectively judge their own cases – deciding which harms warrant compensation.

Survivors of abuse in faith-based care are also excluded from state redress, leaving them subject to differing – and sometimes inadequate – processes.

As more survivors to come forward, they are overwhelming an under-resourced system.

In June 2020, the Ministry of Social Development had a backlog of 2,235 claims. By June 2026, there were 6,654 outstanding, with some survivors facing waits of up to five years. By comparison, a similar process in Canada had an average wait time of 21 months.

Compensation also remains comparatively low. New Zealand’s average payment of $30,000 is well below the roughly NZ$109,000 average payment under Australia’s National Redress Scheme and NZ$134,000 average under Scotland’s redress scheme.

Honouring the promise

Looking ahead, best practice would involve survivors leading the design of an improved redress system, with a single, independent body that includes survivors of faith-based care and offers a flexible range of redress options.

New Zealand could also consider establishing a prominent national memorial to survivors. While initiatives are underway to locate unmarked graves around the motu and establish smaller memorials at former institutional sites, there is a case for something more significant.

Australia’s national memorial in Canberra offers one example. A suitable site might be found on the grounds of New Zealand’s parliament.

Progress along the commission’s roadmap for redress has been slow. Long delays, limited compensation and the absence of an independent, survivor-led redress body show how much remains to be done.

With this year’s anniversary falling amid post-election uncertainty, perhaps the best path forward lies in the Human Rights Commission’s “Honour the Promise” campaign, which calls on the government and other institutions responsible for abuse to implement all the commission’s recommendations.

The government’s apology two years ago was an important moment of recognition. But for those 200,000 people who suffered abuse in care, acknowledgement must be met by renewed action.