The Owen Glenn Inquiry

A Bit of a Yawn

The Owen Glenn inquiry into family violence has taken some strange turns down a back country road.  Glenn is a wealthy philanthropist. He has more money than most New Zealanders' could shake a stick at--which in a country racked with covetousness and a deep sense of grievance is not well received by many.  More than a small minority believe there is only one thing Owen Glenn should do with his money: he should give it us me, myself, and I, since guys like Glenn are implicitly responsible for my hardship and my degradation.

Then there's another thing.  Glenn wanting to "invest" private money to find out the causes of family violence does not sit well because everyone agrees that preventing family violence is the government's responsibility.  If a private individual starts to pay for a public good, concerns surface that maybe we are seeing the first steps towards privatisation of government welfare by stealth.  Inconceivable!  Wouldn't it be better for Glenn just to donate the money to the government and let it get on with it?   The government could even pass special legislation, entitled "The Glenn Special Surtax Bill"--or something of that ilk. 

And then there's the "what's the point?" argument.
  Let's say the Glenn Inquiry is a stunning success.  Won't it tell us what we already know?  After all it's not rocket science.  What causes family violence?  How about alcohol, drugs, abandoned children, marital breakdowns and separations, in-bred poisonous attitudes like selfishness and covetousness and envy, and a lust for existential self-gratification,  coupled with an endless succession of transient caregivers?  These things we already know.  There is a complex cluster of causes.  There is no silver bullet.  We already know that, too.  Will the Glenn Inquiry boringly end up telling us what is common knowledge?  Probably.  Will it conclude there is no silver bullet?  Likely.  On the other hand, if it claims to have found one, it will lack credibility. 

We have watched the Inquiry tip-toeing through a succession of dysfunctional farces.  It's been a parody of family violence itself.  Arguments, disagreements, fights, desertions, resignations, recriminations, accusations, and disloyalty.  Maybe that's the whole point.  Maybe Glenn has a cunning plan.  He wants his inquiry to resemble, to parody, or to act out the modern dysfunctional family before the watching world, so we will draw the conclusion that family violence is normal, ordinary. 

Glenn employed a gaggle of experts--people long experienced (we were told) from working in the field of family violence.  Consultants, advisors, bureaucrats.  They wanted the Inquiry to function as a public megaphone, enabling those that suffered violence to be heard (whilst kept anonymous, of course).  But there is an abiding suspicion that many of these experts already knew the causes of family violence: they were looking not to inquire, but to showcase, to grandstand their case.  The "well-known" causes, some have suggested, are exploitation of Maori by colonialist whitey,  and poverty.  How do we fix that problem?  Well, that's pretty obvious.  We roll back New Zealand history by two hundred years and give everyone sixpence. That'll do it. 

When Glenn tried to steer the inquiry into a less ideological (presumably, more practical) direction that gaggle took umbrage and resigned.  Who knows.  But it's entertaining. 

For the record, our position is this:

1. Owen Glenn can spend his money on whatever (lawful goods or services)  he chooses.  It's a fundamental property right.  He has a right to waste it, if he chooses.  He can decide to direct good money to chase after bad, and so forth. 

2. Charity demands that we give Glenn the benefit of the doubt--that his desire to alleviate or help prevent family violence is genuine.  We thank him for that.  We need all the help we can get.  Every voice saying, "It's not OK" is welcome.  As far as it goes, it's good to see him trying to do something about the New Zealand scourge. 

3.  There is no silver bullet, no key that will suddenly turn us into a pacific, loving community.  The causes are complex, intergenerational, multi-layered, thick, and intertwined.  Sin is like that.  Human culture is like that.  Glenn's Inquiry may help--but it will only be at the edge of the margins, because in the end we are talking about changing heart attitudes and confronting behavioural habits that have been inculcated over generations.  The solutions are multi-valent, diverse, complex--and almost always small in the sense of helping and redeeming one person, one family, one extended family at a time.  How long does it take to raise one child?  About twenty years, day in, day out.  Reversing violence within a broken family habituated to its curse will take much, much longer.  And money cannot do it.  Programmes run by bureaucrats cannot do it  They can only help at the edges--and often do more damage than good, with unforeseen negative consequences. 

4.  Finding "models" that are working or making a difference does not help.  As soon as those "models" are enlarged and expanded to be cookie-cutter bureaucratic/government programmes they break down and fail.  Bureaucratic programmes cannot substitute for face-to-face, people-to-people love, loyalty, devotion, and service.  Bureaucratic programmes cannot change hearts.  The other day we were out on our daily peregrination.  We walked past an older man standing side-by-side chatting with a teenager on the footpath.  The countenances were engaged.  The conversation was animated.  There was laughter.  As we walked past, the older chap caught our eye, greeted us, and wished us a good day.  Priceless.  Multiply that simple act of warm human communication between the elderly and the young by thousands upon thousands.  That's how you raise a child, build a family, and strengthen a community.  You cannot turn that into a government programme. 

5.  All human help will be constrained.  That does not mean we should not work hard at it.  But we have to know our limitations.  Only the Lord can change hearts and mend broken lives in a truly profound way.  Therefore, we must be realistic, yet without bitterness or cynicism. 

In the face of these realities, the Glenn Inquiry is not to be decried.  But our expectations are sufficiently low that we struggle to maintain any ongoing interest.  It's all a bit of a yawn.  The most salutary thing--which is not to be ignored--is that Glenn's initiative provides yet another example of someone saying, "It's not OK" and that--in as far as it goes--is welcome indeed.