Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:606;Page:3646] 
12.  
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (NZ National—Nelson) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: Why was only one of the five young offenders convicted on the murder or manslaughter of Michael Choy on Thursday 13 September 2001 enrolled in a mainstream school and attending regularly? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Associate Minister of Education (Special Education)) 
 on behalf of the 
 Minister of Education 
: Of the five young offenders concerned one was in school and one was not required to be at school as he was over 16. The three remaining offenders were involved with education and other social service agencies in an attempt to address the wide range of issues in those young people’s lives including schooling. They were not in mainstream schools at the time of the offence because they had displayed a range of behavioural problems that despite considerable effort were beyond what a school could be expected to manage. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Having dismissed previous concerns from the Opposition about truancy on the basis of the protocol between the Department of Child Youth and Family Services and the Ministry of Education can the Minister explain why in the year concerned the ministry’s truancy service received notifications of 5350 long-term truants but only made 118—or 2 percent—of those referrals to the Department of Child Youth and Family Services and does that not suggest that his much-vaunted protocol is nothing less than a joke? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: It is fully accepted that the protocol needs strengthening which is why we are doing just that. 
Dr Ashraf Choudhary 
: What is the key to improving the responsiveness of the education sector to participating in problems among at-risk students? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: On reading the report into the death of Michael Choy I became aware for the first time that Ministers had collective knowledge about those young people’s lives that none of the individual agencies had in the lead-up to that tragic event. Although nothing could have predicted that homicide one of the solutions lies in accepting that the challenge of keeping at-risk young people engaged in education is a responsibility shared by schools the wider education system families and other agencies. We are working to achieve just that. 
Bernie Ogilvy 
: How does the Minister expect truancy officers to effectively police persistent truants when their funding has not increased for the last 5 years and some truancy services like the one in Patea are paying their staff from community grants in order to maximise the resources the ministry has given them? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: There is a very good question in there in relation to the two forms of services that we have. We have the Non-enrolment Truancy Service and we have the district truancy services. There are some crossover issues some funding issues and some resource issues. That is why this Government is reviewing the truancy services as a whole. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Noting that Bailey Junior Kurariki was one of 7407 at-risk students enrolled at the Correspondence School when he committed the manslaughter of Michael Choy will the Minister now accept that such enrolments at the Correspondence School of at-risk students are a farce and simply sweep under the carpet thousands of school-age children who are at risk to both themselves and others? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: It is easy to establish in hindsight that a particular option was not working well for an individual child. The member should note that the number of at-risk students enrolled in the Correspondence School at the end of last year was 100 fewer than in 1999 when he was the Minister. 
Bernie Ogilvy 
: Will the Minister consider increasing the penalties under the Education Act 1989 for the parents of persistent truants given the laughable fines of between $15 and $150 if prosecuted under the current legislation and the fact that parents are often complicit in their children’s behaviour? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: If the member had read the report into the death of Michael Choy he would know that the parents struggled very hard with children whose behaviours they could not control themselves either. I do not think the solution lies in punishing parents. It lies in working with parents to try to assist them to keep their children engaged in the education system. We know that if we can keep the children engaged the risk of them offending is reduced significantly.