6. Question No. 6—Social Development and EmploymentJAN LOGIE (Green) to the Minister for Social Development and EmploymentQuestion No. 6—Social Development and Employment6. JAN LOGIE (Green) to the Minister for Social Development and Employment (remote): Does she agree with the widespread concerns about the Oversight of Oranga Tamariki System and Children and Young People's Commission Bill including from VOYCE - Whakarongo Mai who said The Government has not listened to a single recommendation from young people with lived experience … These young people have been effectively silenced and the new systems outlined by the Bill is designed to further muffle and weaken their voices"?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development and Employment): I believe we have a common purpose which is to ensure the oversight of the Oranga Tamariki system is strong. Our children deserve a system that works for them. This process began for this bill in 2018 through specific engagement with children and young people to hear their views which informed the Beatie report. We heard from children and young people that they currently did not know where to go when they had a complaint. This bill makes it clear that the Ombudsman investigates complaints and requires them to have a complaints process that is accessible for children. We heard from children and young people that they wanted advocacy services that were diverse ethnically and in terms of life experience. The bill strengthens advocacy by ensuring there is more diversity in the governance at the Office of the Children's Commissioner. The select committee have made further changes to the bill in response to submissions which include strengthening the independence of the Monitor by adding in a duty to act independently providing for a named Chief Children's Commissioner who will be a visible vocal advocate for children and young people and ensuring the commission can report directly to the Prime Minister. The bill is not intended to address all of the issues pertaining to Oranga Tamariki but it will provide a way of monitoring it and holding it to account. It is a vital part of the overall system and it is imperative we strengthen it as soon as possible.Jan Logie: Why is the bill being allowed to progress when only eight out of 403 submitters supported the bill and when there is such strong opposition from children young people Māori and the social services considered to be experts in the care and protection of children?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: A number of the submissions traversed the same themes when they came in and many of them touched on some of the issues that I covered in my answer to the primary question. Much of that I believe the select committee has done a good job at resolving. It was very clear that people still wanted a Chief Children's Commissioner but we still believe that a board is required to strengthen the advocacy of the Office of the Children's Commissioner. It was very clear that there were areas in the bill where it wasn't articulated strongly enough with regards to the independence of the Monitor and that certainly has been enhanced. We heard loud and clear—I believe the select committee did—that people still felt that there needed to be a direct ability for the Children's Commissioner to contact the Prime Minister directly. So that is another area that the select committee covered off. In the revised version of the bill that has been included. There are a number of other areas where there is change. They came directly from the submissions that were put forward and I am confident with where the select committee has landed.Jan Logie: How does the Minister say that the bill reflects consultation with Māori when the key recommendation from the Kāhui Group was for an independent Crown entity and when Waikato-Tainui specifically told the select committee that the bill does not reflect the consultation they participated in?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I think that all of the recommendations and all of the insights that came from the Kāhui Group and the 22 hui across the country were important to informing the bill. As I said earlier in response to the Māori Party question the only area where I do see a difference with regards to what we received in terms of feedback and what is in the bill is with respect to the form of the Independent Children's Monitor. Yes they asked for a Crown entity; where we have landed is a departmental agency hosted by the Education Review Office (ERO). It still has the level of independence that we were all seeking. If the Independent Children's Monitor when it sits within ERO decides to investigate something or monitor something the Government can't tell it otherwise and the select committee have made sure that they've strengthened the language in the bill to ensure that that is clear and it is in the legislation.Jan Logie: How will the Minister guarantee child protection for children in the Oranga Tamariki system under the new bill given the monitor is unable to visit Oranga Tamariki care and protection residences without notice leaving room for abuse and harm to children to be hidden as has occurred previously?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: The absolute role of Oranga Tamariki with regards to protection of children extends beyond the monitor and the advocacy and the complaints process. So I do want to remind the House that there is a much more fulsome programme under way being led by Minister Davis with regards to the reform of Oranga Tamariki and ensuring that our children are protected. What we are putting in place is a monitoring advocacy and a complaints process that really has been missing up until now with what we see in the bill. It is strengthened and absolutely goes above and beyond what we have seen before and I do believe it will make a difference for the children in care.Karen Chhour: Does the Minister agree that the kindest approach would be to go back to the drawing board with this bill after 311 submitters—including abuse-in-care survivors VOYCE – Whakarongo Mai Save the Children and the Children's Commissioner—condemned the bill and many others felt their voices were deliberately silenced due to the submission period being over Christmas?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I do not believe that it would be kind to the children who are in care not to act with urgency with regards to getting oversight in place for the children that are in care. The Beatie report was very forthright with respect to this and said we need to act with urgency. What we have done is ensured that there is a provision in the bill that states that this must be reviewed within five years. That doesn't mean that it needs to be the whole entire five years. If something arises—particularly in relation to the inquiry into State care that is being undertaken—that pertains and is relevant to this particular area then that can be taken into consideration in a review. As I said that review must be held within five years; that doesn't mean it has to be five years out if there's something that arises that requires more urgency with respect to change.Jan Logie: Is it not true that if the bill was paused the monitor would still be able to keep monitoring the Ombudsmen would still be able to keep investigating and the Children's Commissioner could have an increase in funding to increase their role so there's actually no need for the bill to pass before the royal commission has reported?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: As the member has pointed out there has been a level of independence called on for the Independent Children's Monitor. If we were to delay then the Independent Children's Monitor would remain with the Ministry for Social Development its powers would continue to be limited to only monitoring the care standards and not the entire system we wouldn't have the bolstering of the commission with regards to the diversity at the governance table that we need and we wouldn't have the visibility with regards to a complaints process in the Ombudsman's office that the children so desperately need.Jan Logie: Does the Minister agree with advice given to her by her own officials that "Ministers will need to balance the perception of the entity being sufficiently independent against the need for Ministers to maintain a degree of control over the nature of the monitoring arrangements" and if so why do Ministers need control over the monitoring of Oranga Tamariki?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: The one advantage that we have to the form being a departmental agency is that although we can't stop the monitor with regards to any work that they may want to undertake or need to undertake to ensure that the system is working for the children a Government can say to the monitor "We also need you to look at this." And that actually I think strengthens the power of the monitor for the children that we are all putting first and foremost in this discussion and this debate.Jan Logie: Will the Minister withdraw this bill and listen to the voices of our tamariki and rangatahi and State-abuse survivors like Tupua Urlich who are saying "This bill is a disservice to our voices and suffering at the hands of the State. We are doomed to repeat history."?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: If I truly believed that was the case then of course we would. But I think that we would be doing a disservice to the young people that are in care if we delayed this bill any further and I stand by it."