Bradford Sue: Commissioner for Children Bill — Second Reading 
Bradford Sue: Commissioner for Children Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:613;Page:9818] 
SUE BRADFORD (Green) 
: 
 The Green Party welcomes the long-overdue return of the Commissioner for Children Bill to Parliament for its second reading today. We first considered this bill in the House in October 2001 so as the previous speaker has just pointed out it has been a bit of a long haul since then especially given that the Social Services Committee reported back in April 2002. This is one of those useful pieces of legislation that seems to have really good cross-party support. I know that most people on the committee in the previous Parliament were pretty supportive of the overarching purpose of the bill: to strengthen and clarify the role of the Commissioner for Children. 
As a number of submitters pointed out despite New Zealand having first established a Commissioner for Children under the Children Young Persons and Their Families Act in 1989 and ratifying the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1993 the commissioner’s efforts to advance the rights of children in this period have been hampered by a number of factors. These included a lack of statutory independence for the office underfunding a dearth of any real willingness to involve children themselves in decision-making processes and an overall relative lack of power in advocating for the interests of children. By the late 1990s a number of organisations in the community were so concerned about the comparatively low-level status of the commissioner that they were lobbying hard to convert the role into an Officer of Parliament—like for example the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment—and a member’s bill to that effect was put together by the Alliance. 
The Social Services Committee heard submissions and considered that member’s bill and through the process we came to understand that turning the commissioner into an Officer of Parliament simply was not the way to go. Instead of the role being expanded and strengthened by that course of action the commissioner would lose much of the ability to advocate on behalf of children which is a huge and core part of the job. Thus the Green Party like a number of groups that gave submissions turned with enthusiasm to the new Commissioner for Children Bill that is before us today. Our overriding concerns were that the office of commissioner be strengthened and that its independence and autonomy be reinforced. 
One of the best features of the bill is that the office becomes independent of the Department of Child Youth and Family Services as there has always been an underlying tension between its advocacy function and its structural dependence on the department. That has been particularly highlighted in cases for example where the commissioner has reported on problems relating to the department itself. A second key feature of this legislation is the way in which it entrenches in New Zealand statute the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child to which we are a signatory. The convention is actually written into the legislation as schedule 2 and will in future act as a set of guiding principles for the commissioner. That is a great step forward for the children of this country as the convention enshrines among other things the right of children to be heard where they are capable of forming their own views the right of children to be free from violence and the right of children to a standard of living “adequate for the child’s physical mental spiritual moral and social development”. 
This is a wonderful manifesto to be held at the heart of this new law especially at a time when nearly one-third of our children live in poverty and when so much of our society seems wracked by a culture that sees abuse and violence against children as acceptable. One has to look only at the current pro-smacking campaign to see the extent to which adults are prepared to go to maintain their legal right to physically assault and deliberately humiliate the children in their care. 
A further area of Green Party concern with this bill lay around the appointment process for the commissioner. Like a number of submitters we felt that the pre-existing appointments process under the National Government and the one established in the new bill had not and would not necessarily bring about the best result. We were particularly anxious that the person carrying out this critical function should not be a purely political appointment but that there should be an open and transparent process with involvement from relevant groups in the community. If it were done in that way there would be a lot more support for the office in society at large which is a prerequisite if a position of this nature is to have any real success. We were pleased then that the select committee agreed to amend the bill in a way that I think deals well with those concerns. I believe that the recent appointment of Dr Cindy Kiro to the position while not carried out under the new law is a shining example of what can and should happen when the Government takes community consultation and relevant applicant skills and experience seriously. 
One final comment I would like to make at this stage of the debate concerns the provision in the bill for consultation with children. During the select committee process the Green Party pushed hard for the addition of a clause that would require the commissioner to develop appropriate means of consulting with children so that their views can be taken into account when the commissioner exercises his or her function. Given the relationship between the office of the commissioner and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child commitment mentioned above I would like to thank the other members of the previous select committee for supporting that amendment and I look forward to seeing how our new commissioner implements it over the next 5 years. 
The Green Party commends this bill to the House and I look forward to its final enactment very shortly.