McClay Todd: Children Young Persons and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
McClay Todd: Children Young Persons and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:8794] 
TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) 
: 
 Thank you members for the applause before I speak. It is a pleasure to speak in this debate on the Children Young Persons and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill and it was a great privilege to serve on the Social Services Committee. There was more than a year’s worth of work from the select committee on an issue that is a great problem for New Zealand. I can cast my mind back to when this bill was first brought to Parliament. I can remember the debate in this House and I can remember what members opposite said. I thought then that it would be interesting to go into the detail of the bill at the select committee and really look at the problem we have in New Zealand which is that younger people are being driven towards crime and that those who have been committing crimes are not getting support from the Government of the day. 
We had this bill before us in the committee for a whole year. Indeed the Labour members of our committee from the very first day said we were going too fast and were rushing the proceedings. They had been sitting around there for 9 years and they said the Government was going too fast on its new legislation. A case was made to the Minister for Social Development and Employment and the Minister came back to us and said if we wanted to have more time she would allow it because it was important to get this legislation right for the good of the children. A member opposite is nodding his head; he remembers that. But what happened when we turned up to the committee and said we could take a bit more time to hear more people and make sure the bill that we brought back to the House was a good bill? The Labour members threw their hands in the air and as Mr Mallard said earlier they chucked their toys out of the cot. They said the Government was in disarray. 
Well I say there is a growing problem of youth offending in New Zealand and there has been for many years. I pay tribute to those members opposite who were part of the previous Labour Government. I believe they had the very best intentions at heart for the youth of New Zealand during their time in Government. Let us have a quick look at the problem. I will then briefly talk about how this bill will work through and help to address the problem. 
Let us take the 9 years before 2008 and look at some of the offending by young people. Violent youth offending by those aged 14 to 16 rose by 47 percent. None of us here want children to get into trouble; none of us want kids to go out and commit violent crimes. But in the 9 years until 2008 there was a 47 percent increase. Violence by 12 and 13-year-olds increased by 30 percent robberies by 14 to 16-year-olds increased by 94 percent and offences involving intimidation and threats increased by 69 percent. Members should go out and listen to the public’s concern about law and order in this country. A grievous assault is a serious crime. Grievous assault offences by young people increased by 122 percent in the 9 years until 2008. What happened over that period of time? The previous Government forgot about those kids. I said earlier that I believe members of that Government had the very best intentions at heart but I think they became caught up in the things that they were doing rather than looking at whether children were being helped and whether the problem was becoming worse. The reality is that it did become worse over that period of time. 
We have heard today lots of reasons why we should not pass this legislation. From members opposite we have heard about a lot of the things that they did. They have said those things were OK and were working. I tell members that anybody whose family member has been grievously assaulted by a young person—and those assaults increased by 122 percent—would disagree with the members opposite. I listened to those members during the select committee deliberations I listened to them during the first reading debate and I have listened to them today. The only conclusion I have come to is that I must treat them in the way that the New Zealand public did for at least a year before the last election and certainly since the election: I think I pretty much have to just ignore them. That is what the New Zealand public has been doing; those members have no credibility on these issues. 
The select committee went out and visited a number of institutions that work with some of the children who are the most troubled in our society and who get into the most difficulty with the law. I say to members as a father that I did not enjoy those visits. I did not like to see children up to the age of 17 locked up in a form of incarceration. I did not like that at all. I came away from that visit to Auckland thinking that those kids should not be there. 
We then went to a residence where young children were in the care of the State. I sat with some of those kids and listened to them as they were doing their schoolwork. I did not want to see those kids there and I wish there was a way that they could not be there. I spoke to them and asked a young boy who was 9 what he thought about being there. I asked whether he missed his mum. He said he certainly did. I asked whether he had a bike to ride there. He said it was OK but he wanted to be back with his family. I spoke to the people who run that institution afterwards and asked about the boy’s background. His father is a gang member; his mother is in hiding. There is huge violence in that community. I do not want that kid to be in that residence; I want him to be with his family. But the conclusion I came to and the sad reality is that there are too many parents in this country like that boy’s parents for whatever reason: their background or they do not have employment or they do not have enough money or they do not have a great house to live in. But that kid was better off in the residence. Otherwise he would go on to a life of crime because his mother could not help him—she had to hide—and his father did not care enough about him. So it is the State’s responsibility to help that young boy. 
This bill will do a number of things and I will touch on them very very briefly. We will look at how we can help these young kids. Members should think for a moment. Our prisons are full; we know that. It was a big issue during the election campaign a little more than a year ago. We know that people are going to prison. But are members opposite honestly telling me that the moment that young people reach the age of 18 to 24 all of a sudden they start to commit crimes and that is why they go to jail? Actually if members go and talk to the police and youth workers they will hear that the problem starts for many people when they are young and it gets progressively worse. Then when they hit the age of 18 we say they are not youths any more. We say the problem is solved and they end up in jail. 
Well we have to start at the very beginning. We need to look at the kids that have the most difficulty and we need to support them much much more. Of course it will be about drug and alcohol rehabilitation—absolutely. We heard that in the select committee; the Minister has said it. Of course that needs to happen. The members opposite are turning a blind eye and being political if they think that this legislation is not about helping young kids to get out of those problems. Of course it will mean in some cases children spending more time away from their families in an environment where some of the issues can be worked through. Do members know what has been happening over the last 9 years? A child would commit a crime. The Family Court would say the child must go into a residence. The child would go there for a period of time and then be put straight back into the environment that he or she came from. The child ended up being back where he or she had started from and of course started to commit crimes again. Those kids when they hit the age of 18 would get into trouble and go to jail. That is not good enough at all. 
We heard other members talk a little about the military-style camps. We are not talking about the time when those camps were called boot camps and the people had to wear boots and march up and down. Members should go and look at some of the work that is being done at the moment. In some cases when a young person gets in trouble a short sharp shock is enough. The police may visit the home and that is enough—the young person will stop offending. But for many of our children that is not enough and that means that they need to spend some months away from home to learn to respect themselves and be taught to respect others. There will be some discipline. People will treat them as they should be treated and there will be a large amount of follow-up when they go back into the community rather than dumping them straight back there again so that they end up in our prisons. 
I feel passionately about this issue. I could talk about it a lot more. I could talk about young people in Maketu who go out and rob houses and break into cars but I will not. Those young kids need to be given some help and members opposite know that. We need to start to work with them earlier so they do not end up spending their lives in our prisons. I will be supporting this bill and I think those members opposite who have any experience in these areas should support it too. Thank you very much.