Sio Su'a William: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
Sio Su'a William: Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:21337] 
SU’A WILLIAM SIO (Labour—Mangere) 
: 
 Malo le soifua Mr Chairman. Thank you for the opportunity. I accept what the Minister in the chair the Minister of Justice said about one of the reasons why this particular bill the Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) was referred to the Social Services Committee. However given that this is his last term in Parliament and given that we have indicated to him that we are supporting this bill but nevertheless we have reservations around some of the elements of it I ask the Minister to take on board what my colleague Charles Chauvel said with regard to the claim of right defence. As I recall it there were submitters who had some concerns and issues around that so I would simply ask the Minister to look at that. 
I think it is also important I say to the Minister that collectively around this House we all agree that violence in the home is an issue that needs to be taken seriously. As I have outlined in previous speeches legislation alone will not solve this problem. The Minister should see this legislation as a legacy that he leaves behind for the rest of the parties here to build upon in the years ahead. I say those words as opening statements because I do not believe one iota that we will solve this problem overnight. Over many many years we as a country have built up a culture that is almost immune to some of the violence that occurs in society and in our homes being beamed through television channels etc. I do not also believe that the bill will get on top of this problem simply because when we link poverty with violence in the home we see that there are some real issues that need to be tackled. 
I have several points. First I ask the Minister to take on board what some of the submitters said about the claim of right defence and also what my colleague Charles Chauvel has said. The second point I make and I know that the bill is narrowly focused on the package of how to deal with the perpetrators of violence is to highlight for the Minister the submission of the Children’s Commissioner. Although the commissioner agreed in principle with the bill he noted that tougher penalties and a broader range of offences would not provide a panacea and that enforcement should not come at the cost of the broader social investment required to reduce child abuse and neglect. 
I make the point that Labour opposes the amendment suggested by the ACT Party. I think ACT Party members’ heads are in the sand so far. As well as trying to be tough on crime—a political ploy leading up to the election—they need to listen to the organisations and the significant individuals who are leading the work on rehabilitation. The Social Services Committee members heard that putting people in jail is the last resort and even when we send people to jail we need to engage with them. We also need to work out how we rehabilitate offenders so that they return to society and take up the rightful positive role that they have to play in the long term if we are serious about this problem. This—screwing it up and throwing it away—is what I think of this amendment! I tell ACT members to pull their heads out of the sand and to play seriously when they are looking at this problem. I tell them to stop playing politics with it. 
My third point is one that was belaboured in the submission of the Children’s Commissioner: we must provide support programmes for children and caregivers and rehabilitate child victims of abuse. I can take this point further. One of the submissions that I will raise for the sake of the Minister is the submission made by the National Council of Women. It made the point that families are being marginalised. It believes we urgently need to find ways to recognise parenting as work and to create structures that enable all parents to opt for working at home as a parent if they so desire.