At first blush, this suggests the way has been opened for any eligible applicant to be given $1000 or so to provide the sausages rolls and what-have-you that help nourish mourners after a funeral.
That would require the ministry to change its rules, which are set out here in language that plainly excludes food and drink.
But it turns out that tucker dished up at a tangi is very different from the tucker dished up at other funerals.
Among other things, it is
“… a crucial element in lifting the tapu associated with death”.
The Treaty of Waitangi has been invoked by an aggrieved appellant, the treaty partnership has featured in the legal argument, and a woman’s lawyers have argued to the Social Security Appeal Authority that the case wasn’t just about special benefits for Māori.
According to the New Zealand Herald,
… her argument reflected international covenants that allowed for diverse cultural, spiritual and religious beliefs and practices.
And the appeal authority ruled:
“This feast is more than just a meal; it is a ritual encapsulating the essence of Māori communal life.”
Would an Irish wake pass muster under this reasoning?
We look forward to the test case that establishes the answer.
The New Zealand Herald reports these key points:
- A woman successfully appealed against a decision refusing to cover food costs for her husband’s tangi in a funeral grant.
- The Social Security Appeal Authority found that kai is an integral part of the tangihanga process.
- The Ministry of Social Development will not appeal the decision and is considering its implications.
The reporter tells us that
“… when a woman with limited means was organising her former husband’s tangi she applied for a $1960 grant”.
But the couple (we learn later in the report) were separated.
Does separation not negate the obligation to cough up for the costs of a former spouse’s funeral – with help from the Ministry of Social Development if need be?
Whatever the answer, in this case taxpayers were called on to chip in with a grant, just over half of which was to cover food for the mourners.
The Ministry of Social Development, which hands out funeral grants “under strict criteria” that must now be updated to bring Treaty considerations into consideration, said no to the food and would pay only $775 for the casket.
After some argument, MSD also agreed to pay $162.39 for the petrol used to take the man’s body to the burial ground.
However, it drew the line at the $1026.25 she sought for kai, or food, for the tangihanga.
MSD told her this did not meet its understanding of a “reasonable” funeral expense.
But it’s not a matter of failing to meet the ministry’s “understanding”. The rules plainly exclude the feeding of mourners.
But, the woman appealed the decision, first to a Benefit Review Committee, which agreed with MSD, and then to the Social Security Appeal Authority, which has now come down in her favour.
The authority has decided MSD was wrong to turn her down, and that the place of food – or kai – in Māori custom is “more than just a meal” and is an essential ritual in the tangihanga process.
The authority said this made it a reasonable expense in terms of applying for a funeral grant.
As the Herald points out, the authority’s decision has the potential to change the scope of what can be included in the “modest” grants, limited to $2559 for each funeral, that are handed out by MSD.
In recent years, the ministry has given out just under 5000 funeral grants a year, with an average total annual cost (over what time period?) of $9.7 million.
This means the average grant was less than $2000.
The appeal authority’s ruling suggests that figure will be much higher in future.
MSD told the authority the funeral grant was intended to pay costs directly associated with the burial of the deceased, and in its view, this did not extend to the cost of kai at tangihanga or funerals.
Under its policy, the costs that could be included in the funeral grant were undertakers’ fees for preparing the body for cremation or burial, the cost of a casket, newspaper notices, hearse fees, and compulsory fees for the purchase of a burial plot, or cremation fees.
The funeral grant policy excluded “costs considered to arise from choice”, such as flowers, donations to clergy or missions, koha, chapel fees, car hire and a death certificate.
“The ministry considers that the cost of food is not an essential cost associated with the burial of a body and is a variable cost decided by the family for cultural reasons,” the authority’s decision said.
But whoa. There’s something missing – an interpretation of a document signed at Waitangi in 1840.
Because of this oversight,
… the woman argued, among other things, that the policy failed to honour the ministry’s commitment as a treaty partner under Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
But if the Treaty can be invoked to justify the government contributing to kai at a tangi, will that amount to special treatment?
Not according to the appeal authority:
The authority said it agreed that acknowledging tikanga within the scope of reasonable funeral expenses for Māori “does not confer special privilege and does not diminish the rights of other New Zealanders”.
“We have found that the phrase ‘reasonable funeral expenses’ can be interpreted broadly and allows consideration of cultural, spiritual and religious practices of Māori and all New Zealanders,” its decision said.
The authority noted that the Supreme Court had recognised that traditions of tangihanga were “central to Māori society”.
“Tangihanga practices deeply intertwine the spiritual and communal aspects of Māori,” the authority’s decision said.
“Central to this process is the role of the whānau pani (the bereaved family), whose primary responsibility during tangihanga is to mourn the deceased.
“Food is not only an important source of sustenance but is also a vital element in the spiritual and social healing processes,” the decision said.
“The practices of kai and hākari (feast) during the tangihanga process are integral to Māori.
“Kai, or food, is considered noa (ordinary) and serves as a crucial element in lifting the tapu associated with death.
“Additionally, the hākari, held after the burial or cremation of the tūpāpaku (the deceased person’s body), allows for the expression of manaakitanga (hospitality), as the hosts provide for their guests as a display of respect and care.
“This feast is more than just a meal; it is a ritual encapsulating the essence of Māori communal life.”
For those reasons, the authority said the cost of kai associated with tangihanga was integral to the process and a “reasonable funeral expense”.
“Accordingly, the ministry’s decision to exclude the cost of kai from the funeral grant was incorrect.”
But it was not incorrect, according to PoO’s reading of the rules. Rather, the appeal authority has changed the rules.
The ministry’s website says this about funeral grants:
A Funeral Grant can help with some of the funeral costs of someone who has died.
And:
The most you can be paid is $2,559.20.
Who can apply?
You may be able to get a Funeral Grant if the person who’s died is:
- your partner
- your parent or guardian
- your child (if they’re under 18), or
- someone over 18 and single (with or without children) who you’re arranging a funeral for.
In all cases, the person who died must have normally lived in New Zealand.
If the person who’s died is your partner or child, it will also depend on your income.
We’ll also make sure the essential funeral expenses cannot be met by:
- the assets of the deceased person, and
- your assets, if the person who died was your partner or child.
- prepaid funeral cover.
The website goes on to tell us:
A Funeral Grant can only be used towards essential funeral expenses, which are:
- professional services for preparing the body for cremation or burial (for example, embalming)
- the cost of a casket
- newspaper notice costs
- hearse fees
- compulsory fees for buying a burial plot
It looks like the Treaty of Waitangi, as interpreted by the social welfare appeal authority, is demanding a rewriting of those rules.
Let’s see if all financially strapped applicants will become entitled to grants to help feed the mourners – or, if not, who is favoured by emphasising the cultural attributes of the vittles they will be serving.
Bob Edlin is a veteran journalist and editor for the Point of Order blog HERE. - where this article was sourced.
No comments:
Post a Comment