8. ANNE TOLLEY (National—East Coast) Link to this
to the Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment
Does she support the statement that: “Child, Youth and Family is committed to improving our relationship with community organisations and service providers.”, as asserted in its annual report?
Hon RUTH DYSON (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment (CYF)) Link to this
Yes. Child, Youth and Family works with a wide range of community organisations and service providers, and it should be committed to a strong relationship with these groups. However, relationships need constant nurturing, and there is always room for improvement.
How does the Minister respond to the report by the New Zealand Council of Christian Social Services, responsible for over 500 social service community agencies throughout New Zealand, which said that the hallmark of Child, Youth and Family is “patch protection, lack of co-operation and tunnel vision …”, and continues to fail due to lack of support, when she has been the Minister for all these 7 long years?
I regret to say that I have not been the Minister for 7 years. That remark is totally irrelevant, as well as being factually incorrect—like most of the member’s contributions on questions. I disagree with what the New Zealand Council of Christian Social Services said in its report, and I said so publicly at the time. But I believe that the relationship between Child, Youth and Family and that organisation is important and has been strengthened.
Russell Fairbrother Link to this
Why does the Government invest in improving its relationships with community organisations?
The purpose of these relationships is to ensure that New Zealanders get the help they need in the way they need it delivered—unlike the National Party, whose purpose for building relationships with community organisations has nothing to do with helping out New Zealanders, and everything to do with money. National builds relationships with community groups, like the Exclusive Brethren and the Business Roundtable—
Madam SPEAKERNo, that is not relevant. Would the Minister please be seated. The Minister knows that the second part of that answer was not relevant.
Has the Minister seen the New Zealand Council of Christian Social Services report, which states that after all these years of her leadership as Minister, Child, Youth and Family has no real respect for community sector knowledge or volunteers; and does this not show that her department is reflecting her own personal arrogance?
Yes, I have read the report, which actually does not say that at all; and, no, it does not reflect that.
How does the Minister reconcile her glowing picture of community partnerships with Presbyterian Support East Coast, which has shown that its funding from Child, Youth and Family does not even cover the petrol costs of its social workers, and is it little wonder that Child, Youth and Family is failing so many of our most vulnerable children on her watch?
I received a copy of correspondence recently from the East Coast Presbyterian Support services outlining that very point, but I have to say that, across the country, the over 200 providers who support the prevention of family violence received a 20 percent increase. That organisation was one of them, and I commend it for its work.
When Child, Youth and Family offered Presbyterian Support East Coast $500 as part of the over-hyped family violence koha to community agencies, what did she expect that $500 would do to combat family violence; and is she aware that Presbyterian Support East Coast has declined its $500 on the basis that it is an insult to its staff, that it is “a small drop in an almost empty bucket”, and that it demonstrates “a lack of understanding of the community by Government and MSD.”?
I certainly do understand the strategic consideration that led Presbyterian Support East Coast to decline that increase in its contract price. But I also understand and support the fairness demonstrated by Child, Youth and Family, which offered to every single provider of family violence prevention services a 20 percent increase in its contract rate. Twenty percent of a small amount is a small amount; 20 percent of a large amount is a large amount. That was the increase in its contract price.
Why, after all her supposed effort during these past years, is even the New Zealand Council of Christian Social Services—once her greatest supporter—suggesting that she and her department are arrogant, ineffective, and bureaucratic?