Turner Judy: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Turner Judy: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:624;Page:19316] 
9.  
JUDY TURNER (Deputy Leader—United Future) 
 to the  
Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment (CYF) 
: Is she satisfied that family group conferences are successful in reducing youth reoffending? 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment (CYF)) 
: 
 Yes family group conferences which deal with the 25 percent most serious young offenders continue to be successful in reducing the rates of youth reoffending. 
Judy Turner 
: Then why has the numbers of young offenders facing their second third fourth fifth or sixth family group conference all increased dramatically since 2001 with a handful even on their seventh eighth ninth and 11th last year; and what makes her think that another family group conference or even another 10 will succeed when the first one or two have failed? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: I would like to make two points if I may in response to that question. The figures that the questioner has used actually included a number of reconvened and reviewed family group conferences so they cannot be compared with new family group conferences. But leaving that aside even if there are repeats which there are for 10 percent of the family group conferences that have three or more conferences and 18 percent have two the remainder have only one. These family group conferences do hold the young person accountable for their actions and that is a critical part of changing patterns of behaviour. They also if required by the victim involve the victim and it has been consistently reported that this is a much more satisfactory involvement for the victim of the crime in the first place. 
Lynne Pillay 
: How does the Minister know that the short sharp detention model used in other parts of the world is not more effective? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: The family group conference restorative justice model that is used in New Zealand is viewed internationally as a best-practice model and literally has been picked up overseas including in Australia throughout the United States and the United Kingdom. In the last year alone Child Youth and Family Services has had delegations from Hong Kong Brazil and Ireland to examine with a view to copying the successes of the family group conference model and delegations from China and Singapore are expected this year. Other countries are giving up alternative models and following our family group conference model. 
Judith Collins 
: How can the current rules regarding family group conferences be said to be effective against youth reoffending when one individual has had at least 16 youth justice family group conferences and when will she accept the evidence and introduce a cap on the number of conferences available to individuals before they automatically have more serious action taken against them? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: As with the previous questioner the member’s figures actually include reconvened and reviewed family group conferences and are not comparable with the number of new family group conferences that are being held. Leaving that aside—but it is important to have facts as the basis of the question—it is an important process for holding young offenders accountable and involving the victim in the way that person likes. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Can the Minister confirm that the National Party’s answer to this question—corrective training—was scrapped because it had a 92 percent reoffending rate within 12 months? 
Simon Power 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. The Minister has no responsibility for anything to do with the National Party. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Yes I agree. The first part was— 
Hon Phil Goff 
: What the Minister does have responsibility for was scrapping the previous corrective training programme because her predecessor was consulted on that. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The Minister may address that part of the question. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: That is correct. The previous model was rejected because of its total failure as is being evidenced by the rejection of similar models throughout the world. 
Nandor Tanczos 
: Does the Minister agree that despite the effectiveness of the family group conference model a number of deficiencies have been identified—in particular the lack of family group conferences happening within a reasonable time frame; lack of sufficient mental health drug and alcohol abuse and anger control programmes; and a lack of adequate monitoring of the outcomes of those conferences; and can the Minister tell the House what she is doing to address those deficiencies? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: Yes I certainly do agree with the concerns that the member has raised. In fact they were identified in the baseline review process as being part of the gaps in services that we would expect if we wanted much more satisfactory action from Child Youth and Family Services family group conferences. As a model they are satisfactory but as with any good model there can always be improvements in the operation. 
Nandor Tanczos 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I think the custom of the House has been for Speakers to allow two questions to be answered. I was just wondering whether the Minister would tell us what she is doing to address those deficiencies. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: That was not a point of order. In respect of supplementary questions members are entitled to ask one supplementary which the Minister addresses. On occasions there is more than one question involved in the supplementary question but it is at the Minister’s discretion whether that is addressed. The member is perfectly entitled to ask another supplementary question. 
Kenneth Wang 
: Does the Minister think it is acceptable that four burly thugs who burgled $30000 from Mr Manchao Li should laugh all the way through a family group conference safe in the knowledge that they will not be punished and do not have to pay back a cent and what is the Minister’s justification for this outrage? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: As the member probably knows family group conferences are just one of the options available through the youth justice system; it is not the only one. 
Judy Turner 
: Can the Minister confirm that one of the criticisms of family group conferences which emerged from her own department’s report released last year was that commitments made by the offender to apologise or recompense the victim were often not followed through and does she agree that this failing jeopardises the very purpose of restorative justice and sends the message to offenders that there are minimal consequences for their actions? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: Yes I certainly do agree with the assertion made in the member’s question about the findings of the report and that is why this Government has taken that report seriously. 
Tariana Turia 
: When will the department put into practice policies to empower and invest in families so that they can make effective decisions that address the offending that is often related to drug alcohol or violence? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: As the member will be aware there are is a wide range of policies delivered by a number of departments and agencies that do just that—invest in children young people and their families as a cornerstone of our communities. But as identified by the previous questioner there has often been a gap in access to specialised services. 
Dr Muriel Newman 
: Can the Minister explain to the House what she actually intends to do so that taxpayers’ money is not wasted on those out-of-control young offenders such as the person we have heard about who has attended 16 family group conferences and who does not take a blind bit of notice of them? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: As I have indicated in answer now to three previous supplementary questions that example is not of new reconvened family group conferences. They are family group conferences that have been reconvened for another reason other than a new offence. The family group conference does hold the person accountable it does involve the victim and it is not the only part of the youth justice system that is available in the case of young offenders. 
Dr Muriel Newman 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. The Minister was asked what she intends to do about the young people such as the person who attended 16 family group conferences. We are not litigating the 16 conferences we are actually asking her to tell us what she intends to do and she did not address that in her answer. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: When a member asks a question with an assertion contained within it it is perfectly open to the Minister to answer the question by disputing the assertion. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: The Minister is entitled to dispute the facts on any question. The second part of the answer I think addressed the first part of the member’s question. 
Judy Turner 
: Does the Minister agree with the view of Principal Youth Court Judge Andrew Becroft and others that youth justice family group conferences need to be handled by an organisation with specific responsibility for youth justice because Child Youth and Family Services’ statutory role to protect children means that social workers are more focused on being the young offenders’ advocates rather than making sure they are made responsible for their crimes; if not why not? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: On this particular point no I disagree with Judge Becroft. 
Nandor Tanczos 
: With regard to the Minister’s answer to my previous question can she now tell the House what steps she intends to take to address those deficiencies that have already been identified? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: As part of the ongoing work of ensuring that the Department of Child Youth and Family Services is able to deliver all its legislative and policy services in a way that is satisfactory a substantial increase in funding has been allocated changes have been made in service agreements and there is a constant monitoring of the implementation of the baseline review recommendations. 
Judy Turner 
: Are victims who are asked to participate in family group conferences of offenders who are already on their second third fourth or even their 11th conference made aware of the fact that these previous attempts have failed to stop offending; if not does she think that victims have a right to know that facing their offender in a group conference is not likely to make any difference based on previous behaviour? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: Frankly I do not know but I think the member has raised a very good point. 
Judy Turner 
: I seek leave to table an answer to a written question to the Minister that shows that the number of offenders on their second third fourth fifth and sixth family group conference have all dramatically increased. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.