What's happening with the government's family violence agency and its job cuts?

The government agency set up to reduce family and sexual violence is cutting 22 jobs. The changes take effect from 28 September and will replace 35 existing roles with 13 new ones (RNZ).

That drops the centre's staff from 78 to 52 — about a third of its workforce (Stuff). The cuts were first proposed in June and have now been confirmed.

Andrew Kibblewhite, the Secretary for Justice, chairs the centre's board. He said the restructure would "sharpen" the centre's focus by keeping specialist skills, strengthening Māori capability, clarifying policy, and improving communications (RNZ).

Kibblewhite said the changes would support Te Aorerekura, which is the government's national plan to end family and sexual violence. He said the aim is "a more focused, joined-up, accountable and effective system response" (RNZ).

The centre brings together nine government agencies that all have a role in preventing family and sexual violence (Justice.govt.nz). It has been running since 2016.

David White MNZM, whose daughter Helen Meads was murdered by her abusive husband in 2009, told RNZ the centre was "an ivory tower" and a waste of money. He said it had spent over $100 million since it started (RNZ).

He said he doubted the cuts would go far enough. His biggest fear, he said, was that the centre would "reshuffle the deck chairs on the Titanic" — meaning it would make surface-level changes without fixing the real problem (RNZ).

The Public Service Association, the union that represents government workers, criticised the cuts when they were first proposed. It said the government was undermining its own goal by cutting a third of the family violence workforce (PSA).

The broader context is that the union and the board disagree on a basic point. The union thinks having fewer staff directly works against what the centre is meant to do. The board thinks a smaller team, organised differently, will actually do the job better. The disagreement comes down to this: is the centre's problem that it has too many people, or that it's set up the wrong way?

White's criticism goes further. He is not arguing about how many staff the centre should have. He is questioning whether it should exist at all. He says nearly ten years of spending has not led to any real drop in family violence. That puts him at odds with both the board and the union — they disagree about staffing, but not about whether the centre should stay open.

The mention of Te Aorerekura matters here because that plan needs all nine agencies to work together closely. Cutting a third of the centre's staff while saying the changes will help deliver that plan is a gamble. It is betting that fewer people, arranged differently, can achieve something the full team has struggled to deliver so far.