Hon SIMON POWER (Minister of Justice) Link to this
I move, That the Sentencing (Offences Against Children) Amendment Bill be now read a third time. I thank all political parties in this House this afternoon for the way in which they have approached this legislation. I appreciate that this is often an environment where, under urgency and with these long hours, things can spark up a fraction, but I do appreciate the way parties have approached the legislation. Issues raised by all members on all sides of the House have brought in quite a considerable quality of debate. I include the Labour Opposition members in that, as well, particularly David Parker, who brought quite a technical discussion to the fore. I single out Metiria Turei for two things. Firstly, her discussion around the issue of defencelessness was a genuine one, and I am humbled by the fact that she withdrew her amendment in order to show that the whole House was supportive of this legislation. I give her an undertaking that if there are any difficulties with that particular clause and I am still the Minister of Justice, it will be dealt with.
The bill encourages tougher sentences for offences against children that involve violence or neglect. It denounces such conduct, as does this Government and, I am proud to say, as does this entire Parliament. This is our first step in dealing with child abuse. Other criminal justice legislation, and initiatives in other portfolios, will further address the mistreatment of children and the dysfunction of families, but this is a timely step as the Christmas break approaches and children are especially at risk in stressful environments of mistreatment.
We cannot know the true extent of offending against children. Family violence is notoriously under-reported, with recent research, published in the reputed UK medical journal The Lancet,indicating that as few as one in 10 cases are reported to social service agencies in countries such as Canada, Australia, and the UK. In New Zealand, data on criminal convictions is not stored according to the age of the victim, making it impossible to identify the scale of the problem at that basic level. But we do know that Child, Youth and Family investigates more than 16,000 cases of child abuse each year. Violence or neglect is a regular part of the lives of far too many of our children; one instance is one too many. We all have a responsibility to confront this issue, and I encourage all New Zealanders to report instances of offending against children, regardless of those persons’ relationship to the offender.
The bill has moved through the House very quickly, and I make no apologies for that. The policy was clearly announced and campaigned on; voters provided a mandate for it, and so has this Parliament. It would be hard to find a rational person who did not agree that offending against children merits our denunciation.
As I said, this is just the first step. This new legislation will see the perpetrators of abuse appropriately punished, and will go some way to protecting our children, but we can and must do more. Many of us have followed the recent series of articles in the New Zealand Herald on child abuse and the organisations that have been set up to work with victims and families. Because we are confronted daily with reports of appalling offending against children, it is easy to slip into a mindset that sees such offending as being inevitable and unavoidable. As Parliamentarians, we must all resist that conclusion and do everything we can to develop effective law in this area. As Minister of Justice, my responsibility lies with the sentencing for offences against children, but I can assure the public of New Zealand that my Cabinet colleagues with social policy portfolios are also looking at this issue from other angles. As a Government, we are determined to safeguard the lives of our nation’s children who are, of course, the future of this country. But it is not solely the Government’s responsibility, or Parliament’s responsibility, to address child abuse. As a nation, we all have a responsibility to confront this issue. From the social service agencies the New Zealand Herald is featuring, to families and whānau, and to neighbours and friends, we all have a duty to protect and nurture the lives of our children.
We are now just less than 2 weeks from Christmas, traditionally known as the season of peace and goodwill. For too many children in the past years the opposite has been true. I hope this Christmas is different. I hope that our children can enjoy a summer and a holiday; it is their right and this bill reinforces that right. Next year members will be seeing more reform to the criminal justice system, but we have started today with reform for children. I commend this bill to the House.
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) Link to this
I want to make just a short contribution to this debate. Firstly, I commend the Minister for his management and conduct of this issue. I think he has a reputation, both as a member of the Opposition and now as a member of the Government, as a person who deals with issues very honourably. That stands in stark contrast to what we have seen from one or two of his colleagues in the last 5 days. But, that being the case, let us continue on with the season to be jolly.
This is a serious issue, and I just reiterate, as all members have done, that we share the same emotion in terms of the revulsion we feel for the conduct perpetrated by some people against children. But I make the point that the Government has not outlined one factual example of aggravating conduct under this legislation that is not already catered for as aggravating conduct under existing legislation. Given that that is the case, one wonders what the purpose of this legislation is.
I hope the Government will place as much emphasis as possible on examining, resourcing, and dealing with the causes of this behaviour against children, because I believe—and I think we all believe—that in doing so we can prevent these tragedies from occurring, prevent injury, and ultimately prevent the loss of life. This legislation alone, by the Minister’s own admission and those of others, will not alter what has occurred. I want to reiterate Professor Hall’s comments, and I think it would be valuable for the Minister to perhaps have a conversation with Professor Hall, who is probably New Zealand’s foremost authority on sentencing. He has made the point that this legislation is window dressing.
I close by reiterating the comments of my leader, Phil Goff, who said that we stand ready as an Opposition to work cooperatively, constructively, and positively with the Government, where appropriate, viable, and workable solutions are put up by it. That does not mean we will agree on every particular detail of those solutions, but we acknowledge that this is an issue of moment, and that this is an issue that is far too important to play politics with. I thank the Minister for his conduct, and I hope some of his colleagues will mirror his example. We commend the bill to the House.
CHESTER BORROWS (National—Whanganui) Link to this
It is good to be able to come to the end of the transition of the proposed Sentencing (Offences Against Children) Amendment Bill into enactment and to know that there is the widest of support for it across the House. It is important to bring in pieces of legislation that are precise, that address narrowly certain issues, and that add to a collective of legislation that actually deals with the problem—if not in a strictly preventive sense, at least by addressing the problem as it is within society.
It is interesting to be here on a Saturday under urgency, dealing with this bill. Many investigators around the country are dealing with exactly this kind of tragic circumstance, whether it is child homicide, or child beating, or some other form of neglect. They are working very hard on these things. There is nothing worse than to go through the legal process then not obtain a result; to see a 4, 5, 6, or 7-year-old muster up the courage to give evidence against an abuser, only to find that a conviction is not obtained. It is important to give the judiciary the tools to be able to deal adequately with these offences when a conviction is obtained, and to deal with them in a way that is more in keeping with society’s reflection on them.
In closing, I would like to say that I look forward to seeing over the next little while a bipartisan approach to what we all know, and that is the fact that in this country we can identify the at-risk foetus. We know that the child who grows up to fail in the areas of health, welfare, education, and law and order is born to a woman who has children at a very young age, and may have up to three pregnancies before she is 20; we know she left school with very few qualifications, if any; we know she works in a low-wage occupation or is on a benefit; we know there is very little engagement whatsoever with any positive role models in her life; we know she smokes tobacco; we know she is dependent on alcohol and some other substance; and we know that if we can identify the father, he comes from the same demographic. When we have all this knowledge, when we live in an age when we can put spacecraft on Mars, we must address this issue. The willingness of members of Parliament to vote together on this small piece of legislation, and to pledge to work together on the much broader problem before us, is very comforting, and should be comforting to those listening and those who will reflect on the passing of this bill today. Thank you.
Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) Link to this
I do not intend to delay this House for long at all. I do not think there is any need to draw out this debate, as I think everything has been said. Today we have seen the House at its best, because we have come to an agreement across the Chamber around the broad issue of addressing child abuse in New Zealand. I think the most positive thing to come out of this debate is the hand that has now been stretched out by the Minister Simon Power in saying that he, too, would like to work across party lines on child abuse. We will have to see how that manifests itself.
I say to the Minister that I look forward to addressing the other legislation that he intends to introduce next year. Labour may not agree with that legislation, but we look forward to his introducing it and giving this House the opportunity to debate it and send it to a select committee, where the public can have a say on it. I believe that the only way we will solve an issue as complicated as child abuse—and for that matter, I say to the Minister, family violence—is to have a bigger conversation with New Zealanders. As much as we would like to fix the problem as politicians, and as much as we can put ambulances at the bottom of the cliff—and we can have our legislation, our education, and our prevention programmes—unless we have buy-in from the community and a belief that we can do something about it, we will be beating our gums for years to come.
So it is important, in terms of any moves we make, that we bring the wider community alongside us. That community is not just the community of people who are poor or sole parents. Child abuse and family violence can happen in the home on the hill with the flashest car in the driveway. We know that these issues exist right throughout the community. We also know that some families have risk factors associated with them. In those cases, if we intervene early enough and have the right programmes in place, we could make a huge difference to preventing some of the tragic cases that we are all so familiar with.
I say to the Minister that this bill will pass its third reading shortly and receive its Royal assent on Monday—along with the other one, no doubt. We acknowledge that this measure will not stop these cases, but it will do no harm. At least it has started a debate on this issue. There is much more to do. I hope that this is not the end of the debate on this issue, and that we will take it further for the good of the children in this country.
Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) Link to this
I rise to speak to the Sentencing (Offences Against Children) Amendment Bill. I think it is really important in these debates that we remember what we are after. I think that in a lot of the debate about being tough on crime and all the rest of it, we lose track of the final objective. We want to live in a safer society, and we want to live in a society where people are free from violence. It is important to remember that that is where we are trying to get to. We often get caught up in all the punitive stuff, and get caught up in dealing with all the people we do not like who have done really bad things. That is totally understandable, but we need to keep focused on our objective, which is that we want to live in a safe society, and we want to live free from violence.
The Green Party has been an opponent of violence. It is part of our charter. One of our fundamental principles is to oppose violence, and we have a deep hatred of violence. But we accept that there is widespread violence in our society, and anything we can do to reduce violence should be supported.
We are supporting this bill, but we are pretty sceptical about what it can do. The reason we are sceptical is that it does not appear to add a lot to existing law. There has been quite a bit of discussion today about that. Looking at section 9 of the Sentencing Act 2002, “Aggravating and Mitigating Factors”, I see that a lot of what is in this bill already appears to be law. It is hard to see that the bill adds much to existing law. We will support it because it does not seem to do any harm, but we are not convinced that it adds a lot to what is already there.
We would really like to see a lot more emphasis on avoiding reoffending. It would be great if as much energy went into preventing offending in the first place as goes into putting in place punishments and talking about what we will do about crime once it has happened. The Green Party would like to see most of our energy directed to preventing violence in the first place.
I take note of comments made earlier. I think it was Chester Borrows who said that offenders have often been victims themselves in the past, and I think it is important that we question what resources, time, and energy we could put in to stop that cycle of violence. That seems to me to be one of the key things. What support will we put into prisons, so that prisoners can get drug rehabilitation, access to literacy skills and education, and access to the kinds of skills they need to get a job when they get out? Are we willing to spend the millions and millions of dollars that it would take to do rehabilitation properly? It is all very well to say that we will lock people up for longer and all of that, but if we are really serious about breaking the cycle of offending, then we need to stump up with a whole bunch of money for rehabilitation. It is not cheap; it is really expensive. It is actually not a cheap thing to do. We cannot just pass a law, and we cannot just lock people up; if we are serious about avoiding violence in the long term, we also need to ask what we are doing at the top of the cliff. What fences are we building at the top of the cliff? How are we supporting people when they come out of prison? Are we providing them with the support and the skills they need so that they can get a job, and so that they do not get back into more offending and a cycle of violence? That is where we would like to put our energy. That is where we think the energy of this Parliament and this Government should go.
That ties into one of the key things in all of this: dysfunctional families. The Greens think we should be providing more support to families. We think that increased fines for truancy, which we have been talking about today, will not help families. How will it help families that are already in trouble? So many families are already in trouble, and how do we help them by giving them a $3,000 fine? How does the 90-day trial period bill help them? It means that parents are less likely to have a secure job. If we are serious about avoiding violence against children, which we all say we are, then we have to ask what we are doing to support families that are under pressure and in trouble. That should be the first thing we do. That should be where we put most of our money, and that should be where we put most of our energy, rather than putting all our time and energy into rhetoric about the prison at the bottom of the cliff. What about increasing the minimum wage? All of those are issues that could take pressure off families. We need to support families so that the parents have more time and can do their job properly.
The Green Party took a lead in terms of violence in changing section 59 of the Crimes Act. It was very reassuring to us that the latest UMR Research survey found that there had been a change in attitude to physical punishment of children. In 1993, 87 percent of those polled thought that there were times when it was OK to use corporal discipline; this has now come down to 58 percent—from 87 percent to 58 percent, according to a UMR Research survey released by the Children’s Commissioner. We think that is progress. It is about a culture shift in our society in relation to the way we treat children. The Green Party was very proud to lead the campaign to amend section 59. Once again, we accept that it was not the whole solution; it was only one small part of the jigsaw puzzle, but it was really important.
I will reiterate and reflect on the comments about making sure that the Ministry of Social Development—in particular, Child, Youth and Family—has the money it needs to do the job properly. Let us make sure it has the money it needs. That should be a priority. It is all very well to talk about increasing sentencing and all of that, but what are we doing to make sure that the agencies that actually have to intervene in troubled families and families under pressure have the resources they need?
Finally, I hope there is more consultation with the Office of the Children’s Commissioner, because I think this kind of legislation would benefit from that kind of input. Obviously, it would have been much better had the bill gone to a select committee so that we could have had the benefit of that whole process, and I would certainly encourage the Minister of Justice in future to maintain an open dialogue with the Children’s Commissioner.
The Greens will be supporting this bill, even though we think that it does not make any substantial progress. We do not think that it does any harm. We also thank the Minister for his reassurances about the “defencelessness” provision, and we hope that he will keep an eye on those cases as they work their way through, to see whether there are any problems with it.
DAVID GARRETT (ACT) Link to this
My first contribution to this debate on the Sentencing (Offences Against Children) Amendment Bill was a hope that in this kind of situation there could be a multi-partisan approach to pass this bill, and that is indeed what has happened. I think there has been some very useful comment from all sides. ACT began in the first reading by supporting this bill along with all the other parties, and we end by doing exactly the same thing. We disagree somewhat with the previous speaker, Dr Russel Norman, that it may be of no account at all. No one thinks that it is the whole solution, but if only one potential child basher is given some pause for thought over this coming festive season, then we will have done something good today. We support it.
RAHUI KATENE (Māori Party—Te Tai Tonga) Link to this
On television last night a young mum was asked about her son. Her instantaneous joy at thinking about her child was obvious as her face lit up, and she said: “From the day he was born, you couldn’t take the smile off of all of our faces. He made us glow every day.” This Christmas that glow has been replaced by the dull, gnawing pain of a family trying to learn to live without their boy—a boy who was described as his dad’s hands and legs, in reference to the support he provided to his father, who is a tetraplegic. At the beginning of this year that young boy was stabbed to death by a 50-year-old businessman, who took the law into his own hands, and now a jury of his peers has handed down a sentence, not of murder but of manslaughter.
I take the time to refer to that case because it is entirely relevant to what we are trying to do today in this Sentencing (Offences Against Children) Amendment Bill: to send the signal that violence against children is not OK at any time or in any place. The crime that cost that boy his life was that he was allegedly about to tag a fence. Tagging, of course, was the hot topic for the last Parliament, and I recall, when listening to proceedings from the outside, being amazed at the extravagant language and dramatic rhetoric that accompanied the debate in the House. Politicians from all parties, except the Māori Party, the Greens, and ACT, voted venomously to outlaw graffiti, creating the perception that the violence of vandalism was the issue of fundamental and paramount importance on our horizons as a nation.
Without relitigating that debate, I want to place it on the record that I am absolutely opposed to tagging, and that I accept that it is appropriate to consider any instances of tagging within the context of property law. But I would question the way in which politicians have demonised taggers, and the exaggerated hyperbole that has embellished the debate. I cannot reconcile the dramatic overreaction to tagging with the seeming understatement about the loss of the life of another child. Have we become so desensitised to the horror of murder that the extreme vigilante action of that case is tolerated because, after all, a fence was allegedly about to be tagged? Is it acceptable for a citizen to chase a boy with a knife, and to kill him with that same knife? Was the crime of tagging property deserving of a death sentence for that teenager? Is it acceptable that the crime of the adult was excused as arising from frustration and an intention not to kill, yet a youngster was killed? That was apparently so for a Christchurch city councillor, who infamously said of the accused: “If I was on the jury, I’d let him get away with it.”
Any violent crime is intolerable, but that is particularly the case when it is directed against children. This week the Unicef survey of how well 25 OECD countries treated their young people placed New Zealand at 19th out of 25 countries on the measure of infant mortality. The horrendous incidents of violence against children, which we read about every day, have shamed us internationally, to the extent that we as a nation are found to have neglected the responsibility we must take up to set in place basic minimum standards for the care and protection of children. Strong, high-level leadership and coordination must be shown if we are to achieve the protection of children from violence.
I congratulate the New Zealand Herald on its action this week in running a series of articles on child abuse and promoting the agencies and strategies that are available to keep our children safe. We need the conversation that condemns violence and neglect against children to be a priority at every level of society. The New Zealand Herald is running the “Our Lost Children” series, and one of the articles featured Soala Wilson, who, in 1999, was awarded the title “Pacific Island businessperson of the year”. The Grey Lynn businesswoman has taken the brave step of speaking out about the horrific physical abuse she has experienced, after having been beaten as a child with the belt, the chair, or whatever else was around. She made this proud declaration to the New Zealand Herald: “I will never stop talking about it until society—families, churches, stop telling me to keep a lid on abuse. I won’t—I will not stop until society and families start speaking up and stop living in fear.”
This bill is another approach for Parliament to start speaking up and stop living in fear. It builds on the excellent work established by Sue Bradford in repealing section 59 of the Crimes Act, which ensured that assaults on children in the name of “discipline” were outlawed. It builds on the strong foundation of an incredible network of agencies and advocates who do so much in caring for our children: groups like Te Kahui Mana Ririki, Te Korowai Aroha, Unicef, Plunket, Save the Children, Barnardos, CCS Disability Action, Tipu Ora, the Māori Women’s Welfare League, and many more. It builds on the precedent established by our whānau, hapū, and iwi, our nannies and koros, and our aunties and uncles—those who strive to place loving arms around all of our children to keep them from harm. It builds on the work of the dedicated social workers, teachers, childcare workers, nurses, police officers, hauora providers, and kōhanga reo kaiāwhina who, every day, watch over our children. It builds on the leadership of all New Zealanders who are prepared to stand up for children, and to become superheroes who insist that our children must be treasured.
The Māori Party is passionate about the campaign to eliminate violence from our lives. We salute all of those cause champions who have challenged society to speak up for our children. We celebrate the tribal leaders who are encouraging an environment upon our marae in which those who have perpetrated violence are forbidden from the privilege of speaking on the paepae. We want to see every school, every institution, and every residence practise strategies that prevent violence and promote safety.
The briefing to the incoming Minister from the Children’s Commissioner recommended that “long-term investment in the restoration and rejuvenation of Maori whanau, hapu, iwi and communities is required for the overall future wellbeing of many Maori children and young people.” It is advice that we wholeheartedly endorse. We cannot focus just on the sentencing of an offender, without at the same time investing in healthy outcomes for those who have been offended against. We want to see all families wear the glow of their children, and to make all parents beam with the smile of pride and love for their sons and daughters. We must make the effort to publicly express the value of children and child rearing, to promote respect for our children, and to aspire towards a violence-free culture.
As we approach the Christmas season, perhaps that is the one gift that we in Parliament can encourage every family to invest in: the gift of unconditional love for the precious hope of our future. Kia ora.
AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn) Link to this
I am pleased to rise today to take a call in support of the Sentencing (Offences Against Children) Amendment Bill—a bill that stands up for the most defenceless members of our society. Society is sickened by the abuse of our children, and it has been heartening to sit here this afternoon and listen to the debate in this House, and hear the unanimity with which this House has condemned those sorts of actions. Abuse of our children is abhorrent, and it will not be tolerated. In fact, the only real dissension or points of difference that I have heard in this debate this afternoon have focused on two small points. One is the criticism that the bill will not stop abuse, and the second is the question of whether it is needed under existing law. I want to speak to those two matters today.
I comment that in law and order we have, of course, two things to do. We first have to work to prevent harm—and that is the most important goal—but equally we must also ensure that those who commit crime are properly punished. That is the part that this bill seeks to achieve; its primary focus is not in the category of working to deter harm. Having said that, I do not accept that it is entirely outside of that category, because all sentencing does have some deterrent effect—but that is not the primary purpose of the bill. The bill will, though, help deliver tougher sentences, and that is why it is important. Even though New Zealand has such a high degree of offending against children, the current Sentencing Act does not have any express guidance for the courts to deal with violence against or abuse of children under 14. That is why this bill is important, and that is why it will make a difference to the sentences that are handed down to child offenders.
We accept that the bill is not a silver bullet. This will not magically cure the problems of society, but it is—as members have heard already today—the first part of our plan to deal with these issues. I think it is an important part of that plan. I was fortunate during my legal training to have the opportunity to work as junior counsel for children. I think we would all agree that these cases are some of the most difficult emotionally and legally to deal with in the courts. It is a matter that we take incredibly seriously. But the first step in that is making sure that we have appropriate responses to violent offences against children, and by having specific aggravating factors built into the Sentencing Act we will see that flowing through into the sentences that are handed down in these cases. It obliges the court to take account of these matters in its sentencing, and in that respect it is an absolutely necessary part of the legal system. I just wanted to take a short call today to make those points. I join with the other members of this House in commending this bill to the House. Thank you.