Chhour Karen; Dean JacquiKAREN CHHOUR (ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker for the opportunity to stand here today. Unfortunately I can't stand here and say I'm proud to be speaking at the moment. Today I'm standing to talk about the care of our children within the State and some of the things that have been going on in the background. Unfortunately yesterday it was brought to our attention that some things are happening within the State care system that shouldn't be. I was saddened disappointed and angry at what I witnessed on that video yesterday. I had the opportunity to talk to the Minister in the Social Services and Community Committee this morning where he stated he was not there to defend the indefensible. I understand that but the buck stops somewhere and does he realise that he is in charge of what he is saying is indefensible? It doesn't matter about what the venue is where this happened. These children are put there for a reason: because they've grown up in households with things happening to them that the average New Zealander could not even comprehend or even survive. These children have known nothing but despair fear and anger and they have learnt to react in these ways. We have stuck them in these facilities because unfortunately they are not safe in the community on their own. They are in danger of either hurting somebody else or hurting themselves and we have a responsibility to care for them. We are also teaching them that they have a place in this world and that there are ways to deal with their anger. How are we teaching them there are better ways to deal with their anger if we in the State care are reacting in the same way that they have been treated growing up? Given the multiple name changes failures restructures chief executive (CE) departures and the commission of inquiry into State care—and as we know by watching that news video it's still happening—I wonder would the Minister consider a cross-party discussion that could focus on what's in the best interests of our children because at the moment it doesn't seem like what we are doing is in the best interests of our children. There are multiple issues going on here. There are issues with the fact that the internal complaints system obviously isn't working within Oranga Tamariki (OT). How is it that in an environment where the focus is on making sure our children are cared for and making sure our children are safe the people working within that organisation do not feel comfortable coming forward with concerns about what's going on and they are feeling like they have to go to the media to get attention? It has got so bad that the new CE has given out his number so people can contact him personally. Surely this organisation should be held accountable and be told to do their job properly. The other issue is we are getting more and more articles from reporters that are being approached by workers within the organisation who are too scared to show their faces. Now if I was a worker in an organisation speaking out to protect the children in this country I'd be holding my head high. I would be fighting for the children because if we can't fight for our children what can we fight for? But these people are hiding behind fake voices and blurring their faces because they are scared for their jobs. They are scared for their jobs when they are standing up for what is right for our kids. That to me is disgusting and we should be ashamed of that.We have had articles in Newsroom ranging from June when we had a foster worker that was talking about We are reacting to things going on in the community since the Hastings uplift." This social worker has said that because of the Hastings uplift we've had five inquiries into the behaviour and the practices of OT and none of them have looked good. This social worker says that because of that they cannot do their job without fear of public backlash because they're being seen to be doing something wrong instead of standing up for the best practice—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! The member's time has expired.The debate having concluded the motion lapsed."