Ten years later, what is the current situation? Some things are worse than 1998, especially in the area of housing (even less affordable) and poverty (rising inflation in respect of food, power, and fuel damaging the value of wages and benefits). I suggest health, education, and employment are better than in 1998. So, a special challenge for the Anglican Church in Aotearoa New Zealand presents itself: are we willing to take on a Labour-led government? My sneaking suspicion about 1998 is that the Hikoi moved quickly from an idea to a reality because it was a National-led government we were challenging!

The Official Situation:

At 30 June this year [1998], there were 140,000 people “officially unemployed” in New Zealand – this is one in every thirteen of those who wanted work. Unemployment is an endemic from Cape Reinga to the Bluff but is concentrated in:- Northland: 40% above the national average- Bay of Plenty: 53% above the national average- East Coast: 23% above the average employment rateAnd, the unemployed are disproportionately:- Young: 35% of unemployed are under 25, while under 25s make up only 19% of the workforce- Maori: 22% of the unemployed, when Maori are less than 9% of work seekers- Pacific Islander: 12% of the unemployed when they are less than 4% of work seekers

Other Work Seekers:

Our statistical surveys also record figures on those who see themselves as unemployed but do not meet all the standards needed to be classified as unemployed, for example those on short term training courses who are not available to start work straight away.- 226,000 people – or one in eight – classified by Statistics NZ as “jobless” in March. These are people who are “without a job and want a job” but do not all meet the “official” definition of unemployed.- The unemployment benefit is only paid if no family member has a primary income. Currently 150,000 unemployment benefits are being paid out- 125,000 part-time workers want longer hours or full time work- 162,000 workers are looking for another job (they could include some of the under-employed part timers).

Where have the new jobs gone?

The New Zealand economy has been creating jobs in the 1990s, but not in enough numbers to really address unemployment. While 220,000 new jobs have been created since 1990, the numbers on unemployment benefits still went up! The reasons for this are:- The extra jobs barely kept up with the demand for jobs from school leavers and new immigrants.- The jobs went to members of families where one adult already had a job.- The job growth missed those families and communities that had been displaced during economic restructuring.

The job rich and the job poor:

While there is not enough paid work to go around, the jobs that do exist are unequally distributed, missing those families and neighbourhoods that need jobs the most and creating job-rich and job-poor communities.- Between 1986 and 1996, the number of families with two adults in jobs increased by 60,000, but the number of families with no adult in a job increased by 23,000.- In Otara East, for example, a couple working the average hours had 51 hours of paid work per week between them in 1986. By 1996 this had fallen to 46 hours. By contrast, in Wellington’s Wadestown, the same average couple had more work to start with (71 hours in 1986), but this increased to 77 hours by 1996.- Some communities have been even harder hit. Average weekly hours for a couple in Northland’s Moerewa fell from 60 in 1986 to 38 in 1996.While work is lost in job-poor communities, it tends to be men who lose full time employment. When jobs are found, it tends to be women who get part time, service sector jobs.

The trend towards casualisation

For many New Zealanders, increasingly a “job” means a place on the roster once a week or an on-call position with no guaranteed hours. At the bottom of the socio economic scale this has resulted from rapid growth of service sector jobs (cleaning, hospitality work) where workers have little certainty on a week to week basis of how much work they will get. Work that is intermittent produces income that is so unreliable that it isn’t possible to plan a normal and stable life, let alone plan for the care of dependants. Under these circumstances workers often must have more than one “job” even up to three or four.Higher up the socio economic scale casualisation means fixed term or contract work. Jobs that were previously secure and permanent are now the domain of the “temping” culture.

What does this all mean?

The challenge to create real jobs asks us to re-examine the wider choices we are making as a nation. There has been little real progress on the issue of jobs, most of the policy progress of recent governments has been more concerned with how to organise the unemployed better, rather than healing unemployment itself. Creating real jobs must become, as it once was, a central national economic priority.Kia taea ai te Tangata te whiwhi mahiahakoa ki whea, ahakoa ko wai.Our objective is that every New Zealanderwill have the opportunity to be in paid workMoreSources: Household Labour Force Survey, June 1998 Quarter, Statistics New Zealand, August 1998Labour Market ‘97, Statistics New Zealand, June 1998Work Rich and Work Poor Individuals and Families: Changes in the Distribution of Paid Work From 1986 – 1996, Paul Callister, Social Policy JournalSome Spatial Dimensions of Being Work Rich and Work Poor: Changes Between 1986 and 1996, Paul Callister, 1998

The Hikoi of Hope calls on the government and community to urgently identify options to improve housing for low-income New Zealanders. Affordable housing is a cornerstone of any programme to reduce poverty. Without secure, stable and safe housing, children’s health and learning is hindered and opportunities for social and economic participation are seriously compromised.

Recent housing policy in New Zealand

The 1991 budget signalled an historic change to the way the government provides housing assistance to low-income New Zealanders. The most significant changes were:

- The introduction of market rents for state owned houses (instead of rent being set as a percentage – usually 25% – of a tenant’s income); and
- The introduction of an asset and income tested cash benefit, the Accommodation Supplement, as the only form of direct assistance for low-income tenants and home-owners in either public or private housing

At the time, it was argued that these changes would make the housing market more efficient and fair and address the problem that tenants in state houses received more assistance than people with similar needs who rented privately.

Increased costs

The NZ Council of Christian Social Services survey of food bank clients found that between 1994 and 1996, the number of state house tenants spending half or more of their income on their housing costs increased from 37.5% to 58.8%, and private tenants spending half or more of their income on rent increased from 58.9% to 62.7%.

In 1994, according to The Real Estate Institute, higher state rents led to an increase in all rents. Rental costs have increased by an average of 60% in the last decade while in the same period the overall Consumers’ Price Index increased by only 25% according to the recently released National Health Committee Report.

Overcrowding

The number of households with two or more families increased by 96% between 1986 and 1996 with most of this increase occurring between 1991 and 1996. There has been an increase in hospital admissions from childhood diseases that are known to be associated with overcrowding, including meningococcal disease and respiratory infections.

Insufficient houses

Contrary to expectations, since the disappearance of the Housing Corporation’s subsidised rents, private landlords have not increase their provision of housing at low rentals. Because this type of rental accommodation gives very low returns, it is not considered an attractive investment.

There is a continuing and increasing prevalence of serious housing need – up from 17,500 households in 1988 to 48,800 households in 1993, according to one study. The Ministry of Housing assessed the number of households in 1994 in serious housing need at between 20,000 and 30,000.

Housing costs are a major contributor to poverty in New Zealand

A recent Christchurch study identified accommodation costs as “…probably the issue having the biggest direct and indirect impact on the ability of limited income people to meet their basic needs” (Jamieson 1998). This is in line with results from the New Zealand Poverty Measurement Project, which showed that in 1993 housing costs were the single largest contributor to the “poverty gap”.

Community and social service agencies are seeing the real impact of increased accommodation costs on poverty. Rent was the single most frequently mentioned reason for seeking help from 45.5% of food bank clients surveyed in 1996. Until 1990 there were very few food banks in New Zealand. By February 1998 there were over 365.

The WIN on Poverty Campaign was declined a copy of the 1996 Colmar Brunton report on the Department of Social Welfare/Ministry of Housing survey “because of the extensive errors it contained”. However the Ministry’s own amended results (obtained under the Official Information Act) using March 1997 data showed that 32% of Accommodation Supplement recipients had $100 or less to cover all their living expenses after paying accommodation costs. 49% had $150 or less. These survey results were not made publicly available.

What does this all mean?

This evidence suggests that the current housing policy is far from meeting the real needs of low-income New Zealanders. The link between housing and poverty means that New Zealand cannot be a socially just nation without seriously addressing the issues and problems outlined above. There is an urgent need for change.

We can start by:

- Acknowledging the link between housing costs and poverty
- Acknowledging the existence of significant and serious housing problems in New Zealand
- In genuine consultation with community sector organisations, developing policies to address these problems

More

Sources:
Housing the Hungry: the third report, NZCCSS, 1996
Real Estate Institute 1995
The Social, Cultural and Economic Determinants of Health in New Zealand: Action to Improve Health, A Report from the National Advisory Committee on Health and Disability, 1998
The Extent of Serious Housing Need, Waldegrave and Sawrey, 1994
Measuring Poverty in New Zealand, R Stephens, C Waldegrave and P Frater, Social Policy Journal, December 1995
Foodbank Use in New Zealand, NZCCSS, 1998
WIN on Poverty Report, Women’s Information Network, 1998

The Hikoi of Hope is calling for a public health system that New Zealanders can trust. Many New Zealanders consider health services that are safe, reliable and accessible to be a prerequisite for a caring society. Anything less compromises, in particular, the well being of the most vulnerable members of our society – our children, the elderly and those on low-incomes.

Ten reasons why New Zealanders have lost their trust in the health system:

1. Waiting lists – how does New Zealand compare with other countries?
New Zealand’s hospital waiting lists and waiting times are among the longest for developed countries. Latest official figures estimate 2500 in every 100,000 New Zealanders are on surgical waiting lists – nearly five times the rate of Australia’s and about three times the rate of Holland’s and Canada’s. England also has long waiting lists, though New Zealand’s rates per population are about 8% higher. In 1997 there were more than 38,600 people (42% of the official waiting lists) waiting longer than a year, and more than 20,000 (22%) waiting longer than two years. In Holland a six month wait for an operation is considered unacceptable.

2. Poor accountability to the public
A decade ago the public was represented on elected area health boards. Community Health Committees were established and there was a requirement to involve the public in areas such as mental health and maternity care. Today there is no elected public representation on any health organisation apart from a few individuals nominated by local body councils to sit on CHE boards. In June 1998, the few surviving community health groups had their small state funding allowance abolished.

3. Rural hospitals doing less
Rural hospital procedures have been reduced by about a fifth since 1993. In 1992 there were 1000 surgical discharges from Dargaville Hospital, last year there were 45. Balclutha Hospital’s discharge rate fell from 1716 to 71. Rural general practitioners are leaving their practices because of overwork. Provincial New Zealanders are having to travel to main centres for basic health treatment. International research into safety and cost effectiveness of small hospitals suggests centralisation of services may not achieve the benefits that are often claimed.

4. Larger hospitals are struggling to cope
Total public hospital discharges per 10,000 population increased by only 1.3% between 1994 and 1997, despite advances in technology which enables patients to recover more rapidly and more surgery to be performed on a day-treatment basis. Between 1990 and 1993, under the previous area health board system, hospital discharges per 10,000 population increased by 19.6%.

5. More health dollars spent on bureaucracy
In 1991/92 the cost of administering the public health system through the Department of Health totalled $52 million. The administration budget for this financial year is more than $120 million, shared between the Ministry of Health and the Health Funding Authority. (A relatively small portion of this increase would be due to the administration of disability support services which were previously administered by Social Welfare.) Our public hospital companies employ one manager for every five medical staff (compared with one manager for every 14 medical staff under the previous Area Health Board system). Hospital companies are now spending an estimated $330 million on managers and administration, due largely to the work involved in contracting.

6. Hospitals lack funds to operate effectively
While total government health funding has increased in real terms in recent years, the extra money is not going to hospital services. Total government health spending increased by 3.6% between 1988/89 and 1996/97 in real per capital terms, but hospital funding decreased by 6.3%, even when taking into account CHE deficit financing and adjustments for different funding arrangements when area health boards changed to CHEs. CHE/public hospitals are $1.3 billion in debt; they pay about $60 million in interest payments annually.

7. Mediocre funding levels by international standards
In 1980 New Zealand government spending on health was 6.2% of gross domestic product (GDP), which placed us 4th among OECD countries. Since then we have been one of only five countries to reduce health spending per GDP. By 1996, New Zealand government spending (including GST and CHE deficit financing) totalled 5.8% of GDP, placing us 14th among OECD countries. Over that same period, private health spending increased from 12% to 23.3% of GDP.

8. User charges prevent access to treatment
About 200,000 New Zealanders had not seen a doctor when they needed to during 1996/97 because of user charges, according to a Statistics New Zealand survey. A survey of GPs published in November 1995 showed 71% of respondents believed their patients were delayed seeing their GP because of the cost.

9. Crisis in mental health services continues
The Mental Health Commission estimates staff numbers for children’s mental health services must increase eight-fold to meet the country’s needs, and the number of staff working in adult services needs to double. Despite these signals, Wellington mental health services are facing cuts of up to 20 staff, and the general manager of mental health services at Waitemata Health said severely disturbed mental health patients are dangerously overcrowded and people are being discharged too early because of the demand for beds.

10. Declining health status
Compared to other OECD countries, New Zealand has high rates of cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, breast and bowel cancer, motor vehicle injuries and suicide. Many cases are preventable. In 1960, New Zealand’s infant mortality rate ranked 6th out of 21 OECD countries; by 1995 we were in 5th place. Life expectancy has not increased as fast as in many other OECD countries. Since 1990, Maori life expectancy has not increased. Generally, Maori experience a higher infant death mortality rate (mainly due to sudden infant death syndrome), high death and hospitalisation rates in infant, childhood, youth (predominantly from injuries, asthma and respiratory infections) and higher mortality and hospitalisation rates in adulthood and older age (especially from injuries, cardiovascular and respiratory disease, diabetes and most cancers). Maori are more than twice as likely to be admitted to hospital than non-Maori.

More

Sources:
Purchasing for Your Health, Ministry of Health, NZ, 1998
Federal Minister of Health, Australia, media release, 17 March 1998
British Medical Journal, 11 January 1997; 21 March 1998
Department of Health, England, media release, 16 June 1998; 30 June 1998
Minister of Health media statement, 28 May 1998
Otaki Community Health Group, media release, 8 June 1998
Opposition spokesperson on Health, media release 15 June 1998; 9 July 1998
Concentration and Choice in the Provision of Hospital Services, NHS Centre for reviews & Dissemination, report 8, 1997
Morning Report, 22 June 1998
Health Expenditure Trends in New Zealand, Ministry of Health, 1998
1996/97 New Zealand Health Survey, Statistics New Zealand, July 1998

The Hikoi of Hope calls for income and benefit levels that move people out of poverty. Every day social service agencies are dealing face-to-face with families and individuals who are poor and whose basic needs for jobs, housing, education and health care are not being adequately met. These agencies are seeing an intolerable level of pain and distress in our communities. At the same time, those New Zealanders who are well-off are getting richer.

Poverty is increasing

New Zealand has no set poverty line, unlike Australia, Britain, the United States and many other developed countries, all of which have varying degrees of official recognition of poverty. A poverty line enables a country to determine the number of its citizens who do not have sufficient income for essential items such as food, housing, heating, clothing and doctor’s visits.

The 1991 social policy changes that reduced benefits and increased rentals affected low-income households severely. The poorest 20% of households lost around 24% of their income.

Research data tells us a very large number of New Zealanders now live in poverty and the situation is getting worse. Figures supporting this come from research on income levels, housing, health, employment and education.

For example:
- Indicating the impact of the social policy changes, one study showed the proportion of all households in New Zealand living in poverty grew from 12.9% in 1990 to 16.3% in 1993.
- Soon after Easton’s study in 1993, the New Zealand Poverty Measurement Project estimated 18.5% of New Zealand households were living below the poverty line. This included 33% of all children living in this country.
- Of all people living below the poverty line in New Zealand, two thirds are Pakeha. However, the incidence of poverty overall is greater among Maori and Pacific Island New Zealanders (even though these populations are smaller, a higher proportion of their households are poor).

The growth in food banks

The 1990s has seen a rapid growth in the number of food banks in New Zealand.

-In the Auckland metropolitan area alone the number of food banks rose from 16 to 130 between 1989 and 1994
-In the same period the client list for Salvation Army food banks grew from a little over a thousand clients to nearly fifteen thousand.
-The Department of Social Welfare estimated that 40,000 food parcels were provided each month by 365 food banks in New Zealand in 1994.

We know the figures are higher now. The Salvation Army, one of the main providers of this essential assistance has seen a 22% increase in the use of food banks in the first quarter of this year compared to the same time last year.

Why are people poor?

Some people think that only careless spending and poor budgeting lead to poverty. Social service providers know that this is often not the case. A survey of food bank clients who used church budgeting serviced found that 75.5% of people who used a budgeting agency did so, not because of poor money management, but because their incomes were too low.

Expenditure on housing is the single biggest factor affecting low income households. Poor families spend more on housing than anything else.
The poverty lines used in the New Zealand Poverty Measurement Project are not generous. They are minimal. They allow for example, only $16 a day for food costs for a family of 2 adults and 3 children.

On the other hand, the Department of Social Welfare does not estimate or publish budgeted household costs when setting benefit levels. In this sense benefit levels are arbitrary and there is no guarantee that they provide enough income for people to live adequately.

It’s not only beneficiaries who are struggling. Nationally, around 10% of Salvation Army food bank clients are in jobs and in some areas the proportion of clients in jobs is more than 20%.

The gap between rich and poor

The gap between rich and poor is growing faster in New Zealand than most developed countries. Between 1984 and 1996, the very rich have become richer, while the bulk of the population became poorer in relative terms. The bottom 80% of households had a reduced share of the “national cake” while the top 5% got 25% more.

The government’s tax reduction and social policy programme of 1996 resulted in two rounds of tax cuts that cost $3 billion. Research has shown that the programme has not significantly benefited low and lower-middle income families. Instead the households who do best out of the programme are high-income dual earner families (whether they have children or not).

While considerable tax breaks have been given to middle and upper income groups, further reductions to benefit levels were announced in this year’s Budget. The Budget introduced further cuts to some benefits and a new sanctions system that could see some beneficiaries losing a significant proportion of their benefits.

Enough is enough

The Anglican Church, at its General Synod/Te Hinota Whanui (May 1998) considered the erosion of benefit levels has gone too far. The social and economic reforms have not benefited all New Zealanders. Too many people are now living in considerable hardship. The Anglican Church is asking New Zealanders to acknowledge the growing levels of inequality in our country and the human and economic cost of poverty.

The Way Ahead

The Church is not promoting unnecessary handouts or welfare measures that are not affordable. Nor does it want to see people trapped in poverty and hardship with almost no opportunity to improve their circumstances. Each household must have sufficient income to meet their fundamental needs for food, housing, clothing and medical expenses to have any real chance of becoming independent.

A country able to provide significant income breaks for higher earners could have afforded to lift the incomes of poor households. The Hikoi of Hope calls on the Government and the nation to listen to the voices and experiences of the poor and to acknowledge that there must be better policy approaches that enable justice and dignity for all New Zealanders.

More

Sources:
Poverty in New Zealand: 1981 – 1993, B. Easton, 1995
Measuring Poverty in New Zealand, R Stephens, C Waldegrave and P Frater, Social Policy Journal, December 1995
Foodbank Demand and Supplementary Assistance Programmes: A Research and Policy Case Study, R Mackay, 1995
Housing the Hungry: the third report, Gunby J, 1996
Salvation Army, Press Release, 25 July 1998

The Hikoi of Hope has identified that accessing high quality, affordable education is proving difficult for many New Zealanders. Education is more important than ever. It’s hard to get a job without a qualification and increasingly a tertiary qualification is needed. But children from poor families attending schools in poor communities aren’t doing as well at school as children from well-off families.

Income affects achievement

Children’s abilities and talents are randomly distributed among the New Zealand population but children from poor homes don’t do as well as others in terms of their educational performance. This year the Competent Children project found that it’s the level of family income that accounts for some differences in children’s performance.

Researcher Dr Cathy Wylie says in her report on the project, “Children from low income homes will not approach life on a level playing field.” Low family income has enduring effects for children’s competencies – children from these families perform less well in subjects including mathematics, literacy and problem-solving.

Early childhood education

The most recent research on educational achievement shows that early childhood education makes a positive difference to learning. Children demonstrate more competency at primary school if they’ve started early childhood education before the age of three and if they’ve been taught by well-trained, reasonably-paid staff.

A briefing paper to Government states that early childhood services are seriously underfunded, affecting the quality of the service that can be offered. Underfunding has a more severe impact on low-income families who are less able to pay.

Children from low-income families are less likely to get early childhood education. A 1994 survey showed that only 57% of low-income families (earning less than $25,000 a year) were participating in early childhood education compared with 80% of those earning more than $50,000.

Funding for schools

Government funding for education does not meet school costs. By 1996 12% of school spending had to be met by school fund-raising and voluntary donations. A 1996 report to the United Nations stressed that students with wealthy parents experienced in decision-making are assured of access to better facilities, while students from poorer areas get the bare essentials.

Schools serving poor children can raise much less money than others. The result is a growing gap between money available to schools in poorer communities and other schools.

All children, regardless of ability or family income, need access to good educational experiences to ensure success in their education. To achieve this we need well qualified and experienced teachers and appropriate class sizes.

Adult Literacy

A Ministry of Education survey on adult literacy found a “high concentration of adults with poor literary skills (around 1 in 5 New Zealanders). Three quarters of all unemployed were found to be in two lowest literacy levels.”

Poorer literacy was also found to be high among Maori and Pacific Island New Zealanders. These results come from a survey based on a random sample of 4223 New Zealand adults aged between 16 and 65.

Maori Education

Maori achievement and participation in education is improving. But compared to non-Maori, Maori are:

- Less likely to participate in all levels of education
- Less likely to remain to senior levels of secondary education. (Close to 40% of Maori children leave school without a qualification)
- Less likely to go to University. (If they enrol for tertiary training it’s more likely to be second chance programmes)

Schools that foster the learning of Maori language have a high retention rate for Maori students and a reduction in cases of truancy and suspension. An NZ Educational Institute briefing paper states that Maori education is under-resourced, affecting the achievement of Maori children. The paper also highlights the serious shortage of trained Maori speaking teachers.

Who takes up tertiary study?

From the wealthiest 20% of secondary schools, one in three students goes on to university, compared to one in sixteen from the poorest 20% of schools. Students from poorer school districts are more likely to go to a polytechnic than a university. School-leavers from private schools are the most likely to attend university.

Student Loans

- Four out of five tertiary students now use the loan scheme first introduced in 1992
- Over $2.5 million was owed by about 250,000 borrowers at 31 March this year
- This is forecast to reach $3 billion by the end of the year and $4 billion by the year 2000
- The cost of tertiary education is going to keep thousands of New Zealanders in debt throughout their working lives.

Because of differences in income between men and women:
- 50% of women will still be repaying their loans by the age of 40
- 10% will still be repaying at age 64
- Up to 35% of Maori women graduates will still be paying off their loans at 64.

A Smart Society

With the strong emphasis on the need for a high skilled workforce we must face the reality if our dismal lack of qualifications. The 1996 census indicates 895,209 New Zealanders (33.9%) aged 15 and over have no qualification. This means as well as the educational needs cited above, many young people and workers will need to train and retrain on-the-job. Making that training affordable, accessible and relevant will offer them a way out of unemployment.

Education and training are the keys to our children’s future. If we’re serious about becoming a “smart” society we cannot afford to let our children miss out on educational and training opportunities. But a good education shouldn’t depend on how much money parents can afford to spend on their children.

Sources:
Six Years Old & Competent, Cathy Wylie with Anne Else, NZ Council for Educational Research, 1998
Adult Literacy in New Zealand: Results from the International Adult Literacy Survey, Ministry of Education
Maori Workload, Te Huarahi (PPTA) and Te Reo Areare (NZEI Te Rui Roa), October 1997
The Myth of Equal Opportunity: Wealth of a School-District as a Determinant of Tertiary Participation, APSU/NZUSA, 1998
Ministry of Education, replies to Select Committee questions, 1 May 1998

The Church’s Letter as Presented to Parliament (and accompanied by the Stories gathered on the Hikoi):

An open letter to all Members of Parliament

We, the members of the Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia having made our Hikoi to our Parliament in Wellington, present the attached concerns and supporting stories for your consideration and response. We have been supported on the Hikoi of Hope by representatives and members of many churches and community organisations and have been accompanied on the road and in towns by a wide spectrum of New Zealanders.

Many thousands of New Zealanders have participated in the Hikoi of Hope: Te Hikoi mo te Tumanako mo te Rawakore. Those who have taken part have urged us to carry to Parliament the same message: that the level of poverty in New Zealand is intolerable and urgent solutions must be found.

We believe the Church is called by God to demonstrate concern for the disadvantaged and we do not intend to neglect this calling. Our social service agencies and those of our ecumenical partners are responding to an increased demand for services. The 53rd General Synod/te Hinota Whanui of the Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia initiated the Hikoi of Hope in response to the deep concern expressed by Anglican Social Services to the General Synod. These concerns have been confirmed by personal stories recounted on the Hikoi journey. We have heard how New Zealand’s recent programme of economic and social reform has impacted harshly on many of the most vulnerable in our society.

The Anglican Church, alongside our ecumenical partners, has a huge involvement in and commitment to, the delivery of social services. We speak from experience. However our role is not just to deliver charity but to be a voice alongside the disadvantaged. In this capacity we are calling for new solutions to address the causes of poverty in our midst.

It is our considered observation that widespread hardship extends far beyond pockets of social disparity and that poverty is now structured deeply and despairingly into our society.

It is of concern to Church members that current policy makers seriously underestimate the extent of poverty in New Zealand. Public reporting and monitoring responsibilities in relation to social policy outcome is inadequate. Competent research and systematic monitoring of past and future policies is required to provide a more robust basis for policy debate and decision making.

Furthermore, the experience of those who are hurting and agencies offering them support, is not taken sufficiently into account in the development of policy. The independent social policy research carried out by our own and other non-governmental organisations is similarly marginalised. We recommend a formal structure be set up to ensure the facilitation of information from the community and non-government sector in the development and assessment of social and economic policy.

We are also alarmed by the trend to suggest that poverty is due primarily to a lack of individual responsibility. The systemic nature of poverty must be acknowledged if solutions are to be found.

The Hikoi has identified five broad areas that require the development of new policy initiatives.

* The need for real jobs that produce incomes sufficient for people to support themselves and their families.
* The need for income and benefit levels that move people out of poverty.
* The need for a public health system that New Zealanders can trust.
* The need for affordable housing.
* The need for high quality, affordable and accessible education.

While we acknowledge that developing sound solutions in these key areas is no easy task we believe these are the issues the New Zealand public wishes to see addressed by our elected representatives. We observe that in recent policy development, a fair process has at times been mistaken for a fair outcome. For example, in the area of housing, current housing policies are failing to solve a major crisis in housing affordability, overcrowding and lack of supply. In making your response to the Hikoi we request specific and detailed policy that has adequate and affordable housing for all citizens as the outcome.

While all citizens can contribute ideas and experiences to the development process, it is our elected representatives who are given the mandate, the responsibility and the resources to develop options for change.

We invite all Members of the House to place before the public a detailed programme to address these five issues before December 1998. At the conclusion of the Hikoi, the Churches will host a series of hui when all Members of the House will be invited to outline specifically to the New Zealand public their proposed solutions to address these five key areas. Your contributions will then form the basis of an open and honest debate by political and community leaders as to how to address the critical social issues the Hikoi has highlighted.

The Hikoi has been a journey of hope. It has already given hope to many who feel their cry of pain has not been heeded. But the primary hope of those taking part in this Hikoi of Hope, is that as our elected representatives you will hear this cry and ensure change occurs.

Yours sincerely,
+ John Paterson
Presiding Bishop/Primate and Bishop of Auckland

The Liturgy in Parliament Grounds

This is included for two reasons:
* to give those people who could not be there on the day a record of the basic service, the framework for what is coming to be seen as a momentous day;
* to form a basis for discussion.

Some discussion questions:
1. What strikes you most about the liturgy at first reading ?
2. How should we as a Church and as a people go about addressing Parliament ? What did this service make possible which a written petition tabled in Parliament would not have ? (Note: the Speaker was unwilling to receive the kete as Parliament’s single representative)
3. Do you agree with the rationale for the Hikoi as set out in section (9) ? In particular, do you agree with those paragraphs given to Bishop Muru Walters to speak ?
(“We believe that it is central to the mission of Christ….to just and compassionate community.”
What implications does this have for the ongoing life of the Church ? of your parish ? of your own discipleship ?
4. Put yourselves in the place of those Hikoi walkers who led the final prayers. What would you have felt then ? Share your own experience of the Hikoi.

The Entry to Parliament
(with church bells and drums and conch shells)

The Welcome
(from tangata whenua)
Waiata: “Guide me O thou great Jehovah” (verses 1 & 2) (in English then Maori).

The Invocation
* in three languages
* three voices (co-presiding bishops)
Voice 1: “In the name of God our Creator, in whose image we are all made”;
Voice 2: “In the name of God the Redeemer, whose will it is that we should be freed from all that enslaves us”;
Voice 3: “In the name of God the Giver of Life, whose loving power pervades and shapes creation.”
Bishop Viliami Hala’api’api: brief note about what is happening in Polynesia.

Introduction
(Ian Johnstone)
(Bishop Ben Te Haara): “We remember in silence those who died in defence of this country and of a free and just society;
we remember those who died in defence of the Four Freedoms: freedom of speech;
freedom of worship;
freedom from want
freedom from fear.”
SILENCE

Greeting to the living (by the Primate)

Prayers for the people and of the people:
(Stephanie McIntyre – Social Justice Commissioner): “Kia inoi tatou. Let us pray.
We thank you, our loving Creator,
for all who have gathered here,
for the tens of thousands who have walked with and
served the Hikoi but are not here today, and
for the hundreds of thousands who are here in spirit.
Be present with us now as we pray.”

(Trish Malcolm – Wellington Archdeacon for Youth): “We think of all those who apply for job after job, but only experience rejection. We think especially of those young people who leave school and can’t find work, and for those in middle age who can’t get back into the workforce.
Please help all the unemployed, who experience the damaging consequences of continuous rejection, and the insecurity of very low incomes. For these we pray,”
People: “O God hear us”

(Christina Tapu – Tikanga Polynesia): “We remember all those who can’t afford to pay their rent and are forced to live in overcrowded houses or in inadequate conditions.
We also think of those, who pay their rent, but don’t have enough money left over to buy all the food their households need.
We remember the children who can’t study, because they are hungry, or because they don’t have enough space in their house to concentrate.
We remember all those people who get sick as a result of dampness, coldness or their inability to afford power and gas. For these we pray,”
People: “O God hear us.”

(Bruce Hansen – Moderator of the Presbyterian Church): “We think of all those whom our health services have failed.
We remember particularly the families who cannot afford a visit to a doctor and the cost of the prescriptions afterwards.
We pray for the thousands of children who have become unnecessarily sick, for the adults too,
and especially for all those who have died, whose deaths could have been avoided. For these we pray,”
People: “O God hear us”.

(Flora Tuhaka – Tikanga Maori & Anglican Family Centre): “He inoi Maori (- a prayer in Maori)”

(Campbell Roberts of the Salvation Army): “We think of all those people in Aotearoa New Zealand who live in poverty, and don’t have enough money to meet their basic needs for food, shelter and other crucial costs.
We know how unfair it is that people have to live this way in a country with the resources we have.
We think of the fear and anxiety that poverty breeds, and the sense of hopelessness that follows.
We remember the children growing up in poverty and the parents managing their families in poverty. For these we pray,”
People: “O God hear us”.

(Julian Wilcox – Tikanga Maori): “We think of all the young people who begin their adult life owing large debts to the Government, to pay for their right to study,
We think also of those who want a higher education but are denied it because they don’t want to run up a large debt,
We remember all those who are not able to access the education they want, because they or their families cannot afford it. For these we pray,”
People: “O God, hear us.”

(The Revd Elder Risatisoni Ete): A prayer in Samoan

(Bonnie Robinson – Christian Social Services Council):
“We pray especially for all those who make decisions that affect the lives of people with all these problems,
and we plead for social policies and planning that will ensure every New Zealander can live decently, out of poverty and with dignity.
Please help all the members of our Parliament, and all the political parties, to recognise that too many new Zealanders are suffering unnecessarily,
and that as a nation we need a greater sense of political compassion and justice.
We pray for the creation of real jobs, affordable housing, a public health system that people can trust, benefit and wage levels that move people out of poverty, and affordable and accessible education, to give our people hope. For all these we pray.”
People: “O God hear us.”
Sung response: “Kumbaya”

Two Scripture readings
Isaiah 58:6-11 (read by Rabbi Michael Abraham – Liberal Jewish Synagogue)
Luke 6:20-21, 24-26 (read by Cardinal Tom Williams – Roman Catholic Church)

The rationale for the Hikoi and its central demands:
(Bishop Muru Walters – Tikanga Maori): “We believe that it is central to the mission of Christ
to participate, by word and action, in the struggles of
the poor for justice.
We believe that our allegiance, and the rightful
allegiance of this land, is not to Money but to God,
our calling is not to greed but to sharing,
our dignity is found not in possessions
but in service to others,
and our duty is not to any ideology of self
but to just and compassionate community.”
(Bishop Penny Jamieson – Tikanga Pakeha): “We therefore come to this Parliament
with our hearts touched by the pain of the growing poverty in this nation,
with our minds full of the stories of this pain, yet with our spirits full of hope in the faithfulness of the God of justice.”
(Winston Halapua – Tikanga Polynesia): “We bring the cry of people for real jobs, affordable housing, a health system we can trust, income and benefit levels that move people out of poverty, and high quality affordable and accessible education.
We bring that cry to this place of power where decisions are made that touch us all, and policies from which so many of us feel excluded.”

Presentation of the Kete
(Introduction by Ian Johnstone)
Co-Presiding Bishop Whakahuihui Vercoe says:
“We, the Presiding Bishops of the three tikanga Church of Aotearoa New Zealand and Polynesia, present these kete on behalf of the many thousands of New Zealanders who have walked this Hikoi of Hope with us. These baskets carry within them the tears, pain and hopelessness that we encountered so widely on this walk. They also carry the hopes for a new society, where everyone is valued and has the means to participate fully in the life of our country.”
Bishop Viliami Hala’api’api says:
“In these kete are some of the stories we gathered during the Hikoi from Cape Reinga and from Stewart Island to this city. We commend them and the cry that comes from them, to you. Inside the kete there is also a letter outlining the deep concerns of this Hikoi, and our invitation to you, as our politicians, to achieve the great Hope of all who have walked for a just and inclusive Aotearoa New Zealand.”
Primate John Paterson says:
“On behalf of the people of this land, we seek for all New Zealanders * real jobs
* affordable housing
* a health service people can trust
* benefits and wage levels that move
people out of poverty
* affordable and accessible education.”
Sir Paul Reeves says: “The pain and dislocation have gone too far. Enough is enough.”

Seven groups of three Hikoi people walk across the forecourt to the lower steps of Parliament where the Political Party representatives and a representative of the Independent MPs are standing with members of the other tikanga in their Parties. Each representative is presented with a kete which has within it a sample of the stories gathered during the Hikoi from throughout New Zealand, and a letter outlining the concerns of the Hikoi and the Five Demands.
There is a brief response, one each from both sides of the House

Samoan choirs sing: “Faafetai i le Atua”

Closing prayers:
* The Lord’s Prayer (in one’s own language).
* (Five people who have walked the Hikoi from North or South: Nikora Nitro, Dayanna Ropata, Heather Flavell,& Here Williams, & a Polynesian walker):
“Voice 1: O Christ of the road of the wounded,
O Christ of the tears of the broken,
We give you thanks that in us and with us have
journeyed your hopes for your people;
Voice 2: We give you thanks that in our walking and talking and listening you have granted us your love and your strength;
Voice 3: We give you thanks for the generosity of spirit we have encountered in the people of this land;
Voice 4: We give you thanks for the richness of what we have shared together: faith, vulnerability, courage,
hospitality, and renewed vision and hope for the future.
Voice 5: We now commit ourselves to serve that vision and live in that hope, in the power of your suffering love. Amen.”

Blessing in three languages
Co-Presiding Bishops and Presiding Bishop

Hymn: “Whakaaria mai”

Introduction

In September 1998, thousands walked the length of New Zealand in a hikoi dubbed the “Hikoi of Hope”. Organised by the Anglican Church of New Zealand, the hikoi was a protest against current Government policies on health, education, and social issues, which, the organisers said, were creating “intolerable levels of poverty and social breakdown”.

About 40,000 New Zealanders took part in the Hikoi, which was first proposed in May 1998 at the General Synod of the Anglican Church. The Hikoi was sparked by accounts of community distress and growing poverty throughout New Zealand, and was actively supported by other churches and groups. The organisers wanted the Hikoi to be “something much larger than an Anglican presentation of concerns” and with these thousands involved, it certainly was.(1)

The long march began in the North at Spirits Bay, and in the South at Stewart Island. The walkers travelled through many rural settlements and most provincial towns and cities in the country. They then converged in Wellington on 1 October to confront Parliament with demands for the creation of “real jobs, a public health system people can trust, benefits and wages that will move people out of poverty, affordable housing, and accessible education.” Their aims were to encourage a change in political priorities, a step away from the free market policies of politicians and economists that had led this country down a path where poverty was increasing and social services were being undermined.(2)

In 1998, New Zealand had the fastest growing gap between the rich and the poor out of all OECD countries. Four out of five households had a smaller share of the country’s total income than they did before Rogernomics brought in free market policies.(3) In the years before the Hikoi, health services in rural areas had diminished, benefits had been cut and invalid sickness benefits frozen. State housing rent prices went up, and market rents soon followed, while land and businesses were sold to overseas buyers. Job opportunities in small towns and rural areas were lost to international companies, and government subsidies for education providers were lowered.

But the underlying aim of the Hikoi was to show that the plight of those in poverty had been recognised and was being addressed – to give hope to those with little hope left. During the walk, stories of hardship were collected, to be presented to Parliament, along with solutions to the issues highlighted by the Hikoi.

More on the key issues addressed by the Hikoi

And details of the Encounter at Parliament

1. Rt Rev John Paterson as reported in “Poverty March Ready For the Road”, The Press, 28th Aug 1998
2. Gulf News, 27th Aug 1998, “Anger Over Poverty, Declining Social Services”
3. Socialist Worker, “Support the Hikoi of Hope!” 31 August 1998