5. HEKIA PARATA (National) Link to this
to the Minister for Social Development and Employment
What work is currently under way to address New Zealand’s high rates of child abuse and neglect?
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) Link to this
This Government is serious about reducing rates of child abuse and neglect. We have a number of initiatives under way to address this issue. We are making policy changes to ensure multi-agency involvement in identifying children who are at risk. Getting consistent reporting and data across all Government agencies would be a start. Next month we will be focusing on the “Never, ever shake a baby” campaign, and we are very excited about the Whānau Ora development.
Hon PAULA BENNETT Link to this
Like we have seen in the news stories this morning about 7-month-old Star Anise Waru, we are all failing our kids at some level. New cases of child abuse are bad enough, but when we see over 1,800 children abused again within 6 months, we have to do something about it. Yesterday the Opposition indicated that it was sick of hearing about this issue, but while New Zealanders keep beating and killing our babies, this Government will keep talking about it.
Dr Rajen PrasadHas she seen the comments from the chief social worker, Dr Marie Connolly, who was recently appointed as honorary professor at the University of Auckland, that developments in child welfare in New Zealand still place us at the forefront of innovation, that other countries look to New Zealand and see our legislation as progressive, and that new systems developed here create opportunities for families and children to be effectively connected to services; if so, how can she substantiate her claim that Labour did nothing for children when it was in Government?
Hon PAULA BENNETT Link to this
Yes, I most certainly have seen that research. Let us get this right: there is a lot of stuff we really do well. There is the family group conference system and the way that works. I make no apologies for saying that we are not getting it right for all of those children. It is as simple as that. It does not mean that we will not challenge ourselves to do it better and look at best practice and how we move forward.
Hon Annette KingI raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think I heard in the Minister’s answer that yesterday Labour members were saying they were sick of hearing about child abuse. I take exception to that, because it is not true.
Hon PAULA BENNETT Link to this
Mr Speaker, you can look back at the transcript from yesterday. When I was talking about child abuse and neglect, words were reported from Opposition members yelling out at the time that indicated that they did not see the situation as serious.
Mr SPEAKERI cannot really deal with this matter in any particular way, because it is not a matter where the member can justifiably take personal offence. In the past we have allowed members to believe that personal offence has been taken and to ask a Minister to withdraw something. This comment is what would be seen more as a contestable comment, I would say, rather—
The member should not interject while I am on my feet. I do not believe I can take this matter further. There are opportunities for further questions to question the Minister on why she made that comment, but I cannot rule on it under a point of order.
Hon Darren Hughes Link to this
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The point of order is about the provisions in the Standing Orders that it is unparliamentary to accuse a political party of anything one could not accuse an individual member of. So any reference to a member that would be considered unparliamentary equally applies if it refers to an entire party. You have ruled on a number of occasions your desire to lift the tone of the House. I think on sensitive issues like this where every member of Parliament has exactly the same view—they want to stop this practice; everyone shares that view—to try to put that projection on to one political party causes offence and leads to disorder. The deputy leader of the Labour Party has raised that issue by saying she takes offence, as all Labour members do, just as National members would have if we had said something like that about them, which we have not done in this case.
We do not need to take further time on this matter. I have already ruled that I considered that this was more a matter of a contestable comment. I fear that if we get too sensitive about all these things, all manner of stuff will get ruled out. I think if the members are concerned about this issue, when this kind of question comes up they should make sure that they do not interject, so that there is less chance for other members of the House to misinterpret the interjections. That often leads to this kind of situation. It was obviously interjections yesterday that caused the Minister to arrive at this conclusion, and I cannot help that. The remedy is partly in the members’ own hands.
Hon Clayton Cosgrove Link to this
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Without challenging your ruling, I seek your advice. I could be wrong, but as I understand it, when a comment is made in the House and a member takes offence to that comment, it is not for the Chair, with respect, to judge the gravity or the level of that offence. Offence has been taken. I would have thought that very few things could be more offensive than the suggestion that someone is somehow tacitly or otherwise supporting child abuse or being inactive in its opposition. The deputy leader of the Labour Party has taken personal offence to that. My understanding is that if offence is taken, you are duty-bound to call on the person to withdraw and apologise.
No, I do not need to hear further on this matter. If the member thought about what he has put to me under a point of order—and I do not intend taking this matter any further—he would quickly see that members could take offence to anything. If the Speaker did not exercise some discretion on this matter, nothing could be said in this House without someone taking offence to it. Members have to be sensible and reasonable about these matters. As I said, the remedy is in members’ hands. When sensitive matters are handled by way of question, then interjections should be much more careful, otherwise impressions can be given like the one the Minister gained yesterday. That is the end of the matter. I am not taking this matter any further.
I warn the honourable member that I have ruled on the matter. There is nothing further to be dealt with.
Hon Clayton Cosgrove Link to this
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I will actually support your ruling, because— [ Interruption]
Hon Clayton Cosgrove Link to this
As I understand it, you have said—and, with respect, I would like some clarification—that members can take offence to any matter. Is the Standing Order now that you are to be the judge as to whether the offence taken has veracity or is credible? Is it the new position that in the House you shall judge that? That is what I am asking. Or are we to revert to tradition in cases where members take offence? I would have not thought that anything could have been more offensive than what has transpired here today—
The member will resume his seat. I invite the member to reflect on what he has said. He has been in this House for some years and it has always been the case that the Speaker makes judgments all the time about the seriousness of issues. The honourable member may recollect that yesterday his leader took offence over something that other members of the House did not think was particularly offensive in the way it was said. I supported the Leader of the Opposition because I believed he had some justification in feeling personally offended.