Clendon David: Children Young Persons and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Clendon David: Children Young Persons and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:660;Page:9028] 
DAVID CLENDON (Green) 
: 
 I have come late to this debate but I want to take just a very brief call in order to make a few comments to reaffirm the Greens’ opposition to the Children Young Persons and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill and to support some of the statements that have been made tonight. 
The first point that I must make has already been made but it is worth repeating and repeating: 12 and 13-year-olds are children. To the surprise of neither of us I disagree with Mr Garrett who tells us that some of these young offenders are no longer children despite their chronological age. In fact they are children. They are damaged children; they are corrupted children. They are children who have been formed and shaped by poverty by neglect by a lack of opportunity by a lack of basic nutrition and by a lack of education. I recently had the pleasure of spending some time with a niece and some of her friends who are 15 and 16-year-old young women. I use the words “young women” deliberately. That young lady is a very very different person from the one that she was 3 and even 2 years ago. A substantial evolution a significant change occurs at that age between a child of 11 or 12 and a young woman of 15. To deny that is I am afraid a denial of what many of us who are parents and carers of children know to be the reality. 
There is a question of responsibility. We share responsibility for the offences that young children commit. They are terrible offences and it is tragic to see that young people are committing these crimes. But the fact is that it is our responsibility—ours more than anyone else’s as parliamentarians. This bill does not address the resolution of the issue of how we face up to those responsibilities. Punishment is not the appropriate response to a failure to nurture young children in a way that prevents them from turning into damaged children. Why are kids on the street at night and conceivably committing crime? Today we had a rally at the front of Parliament’s steps by the cleaners who keep this place habitable and a nice place to be in. They earn $12.55 an hour. A minimum wage of $15 might go a long way towards enabling those people to spend more time in their own homes. We need to ensure there is a decent basic wage for every family. When I was bringing up my daughter I was able to support a small family on a single income but that is simply not an option for many people today. 
Beneficiaries—in particular those on the domestic purposes benefit—are now under enormous pressure to return to work when their youngest child hits around the age of 6. I fail to see the simple economic calculation in that. It seems to me that that is a very expensive policy. We are forcing women into the workforce and taking them away from the care of their own children but I ask who is better to look after a child than a parent? The fact is that people who are on low incomes and benefits can seldom afford stable housing. We know that children who are transient who do not have a secure stable home are those who are most likely to offend. Again a number of policy settings can improve the likelihood that children will be nurtured and brought up in a stable family home but we are not seeing those emerge from this Government I have to say. 
A reference was made earlier to the opposition to this bill perhaps reflecting an outdated view. I would put it to the member who made that comment that this bill—and I am echoing my co-leader who made the point—sounds like something from the 18th or early 19th centuries. The fact is that we would punish the child rather than look in the mirror and challenge ourselves to make sure that damaged children do not emerge. 
The point was made that the Police Association supports this bill. I would just make the passing comment that it opposes the “three strikes” legislation so let us give the same mana to the association’s statement as some would have us give to this bill. I say that in the context clearly of supporting the police in their work. 
That is probably as much as I need to say but I reiterate that this issue is a social tragedy. We need to take responsibility for it. We need to find an intelligent informed and long-term solution to it and this bill is not that solution. Kia ora.