Rich Katherine: Urgent Debates — Department of Child Youth and Family Services—Report  
Rich Katherine: Urgent Debates — Department of Child Youth and Family Services—Report  
[Volume:613;Page:9939] 
KATHERINE RICH (National) 
: 
 I move  
That the House take note of a matter of urgent public importance 
. The report on the investigations into the deaths of Saliel Aplin and Olympia Jetson makes incredibly sad reading. If we look at the short lives of those girls we begin to question whether they had any chance at all. Those girls lived in 10 homes. They attended six different schools and they lived in an incredibly violent home. They lived with their grandparents for a space of time and for most of their lives were continually under the notice and watch of the Department of Child Youth and Family Services. They were continually under the watchful eye of counsellors for most of their lives. 
It is quite clear that all the different social services agencies had a fair understanding of one piece of this family’s story. Each of the social services agencies held one piece of the jigsaw puzzle that made up the total picture. Unfortunately because those groups did not speak with one another because there was insufficient communication the pieces in that jigsaw puzzle never came together so that the risk to those girls could be identified. I am not going to pretend that the Department of Child Youth and Family Services—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Would the member’s own colleagues allow her to have her say. 
Dail Jones 
: On both sides of the House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am talking particularly about people very close to her. 
KATHERINE RICH 
: I am not going to pretend that the Department of Child Youth and Family Services held the knife. I am not going to pretend that the department is responsible for the deaths of Saliel Aplin and Olympia Jetston—Bruce Howse is responsible for the deaths of those girls. However I would not be doing my job as an Opposition spokeswoman if I did not hold the department to account and highlight the deep concerns that I think most members in this House have about the workings of the Department of Child Youth and Family Services. 
Over the last 4 years we have seen a lot of reports. In June 2000 we saw the James Whakaruru report and in December 2000 we saw the Judge Mick Brown report. We have seen blueprints we have seen reviews and we have seen report after report but sadly most of those reports gather dust because the Government has failed to implement most of the recommendations and suggestions they contain. The names of the children have changed but many of the issues remain the same. Many of the issues facing the Department of Child Youth and Family Services have not changed in the last 4 years. Sadly that has been to the detriment of Saliel Aplin and Olympia Jetson. That has meant that the services those girls received from the department were not up to scratch and befitting the care of New Zealand citizens particularly New Zealand citizens who are in need of the type of support that the Department of Child Youth and Family Services should hopefully be able to give. 
The Masterton office has an incredibly difficult job. At the moment that whole area is the child-death capital of this country. That community has faced a number of really difficult issues such as the Lillybing case and the Ratima case. But that means that the onus on the Department of Child Youth and Family Services to provide better services is all the more important. In the last 4 years that office has been restructured. In the last 4 years it has lost staff—staff with leadership roles. 
One particular staff member had played a very important role in terms of setting up the roopu team within that office. The roopu team looks after the cases of Maori children in the area. It is supposed to provide specific culturally sensitive services to Maori children in Masterton. Unfortunately though while on a chalkboard the theory may have looked as though it would work the staff members who were part of that team were in my view on a hiding to nothing. They were overworked. For some reason—and the Minister today was unable to explain why—the roopu team in that office had a caseload that was 36 percent higher than the general team’s caseload. The members of that team lost one of their key staff members who had played a huge role in the establishment of the service they provided. They were restructured. They had a difficult time. Frankly it was a time-bomb ticking. If the mistakes had not been made in respect of the Aplin and Jetson girls they would have been made elsewhere. 
 We need to have very high expectations of the Department of Child Youth and Family Services. It deals with the nation’s most vulnerable children. It is not good enough for the Minister to blame just two staff members and pretend that the rest of the department is going along swimmingly. We all know that that is not the case. The baseline review has told us that that is not the case. 
The baseline review made very disturbing reading and I think the Government was quite cynical in its timing of the release of that report. Because it wanted to release that report at the time so that it could say “Oh well we’re going to be doing something about it.” when this one came along. We have been waiting for this report to come along since the beginning of the year and the Minister has sat on the Department of Child Youth and Family Services report and I believe actively discouraged the Commissioner for Children from releasing its report. 
I feel sorry for the Office of the Commissioner for Children because it puts its heart and soul into many of the reports it writes. This morning I reread the report of the James Whakaruru case. Many of the recommendations in that report in my view have been ignored and many of the recommendations are retold today in the Aplin report. The names of the children have changed but the facts of the difficult nature of the Department of Child Youth and Family Services and the dysfunctional nature of that department have not changed. We have seen no progress in 4 years. We have seen no progress in an area where all New Zealanders frankly deserve to have a better service. 
I cannot understand why parents like Ron Burrows can ring up and talk about incredibly concerning issues for them and not even have a note taken. I cannot explain as a mother how any child’s note stating “My father is going to kill me.” is not even seen as worthy of being a separate notification. I cannot understand how Saliel Aplin can say things like “Bruce is going to kill us.” and for that to be largely ignored or dismissed. 
The real issue here is that one does have some people working at the frontline who have largely become desensitised to the issue of family violence and I include the police in that as well. We have a group of people who deal with some gut-wrenching situations; but that is no excuse to pretend or to believe that family violence has become normalised in New Zealand society. We need to be able to aspire to a better situation for our families in this country. Right now how can any parents feel confident when they ring up the Department of Child Youth and Family Services that their views are going to be first noted down; second listened to with any seriousness; and third dealt with in an appropriate way? 
At the moment we have 3132 children whose cases have been classed as notifications by the department but they have not even been allocated to a social worker yet. The sad thing is that 75 percent of all abuse cases come from the lower rankings of urgency and that is the level of urgency of those 3132 cases; so who knows whether there is another Coral Burrows another Saliel Aplin or another Olympia Jetson waiting amongst that large group of 3132 children. 
Judge Mick Brown must be feeling very frustrated because he put together an excellent report. In that report he told the Government that it needed to reduce the unallocated case list to zero within 6 months. That Minister over there signed up to that recommendation. Sure later on he diluted it down into a blueprint or some other diluted version but at the time he said that the Government would put in place that report. Right now with the unallocated case list being so incredibly large not only has the Minister failed but it looks like he has abandoned that particular objective altogether. 
I believe that New Zealand children do deserve to have a better service than they are receiving from the Department of Child Youth and Family Services right now. There is no way given the performance of this department that I would let it anywhere near my children. When I am dealing with Department of Child Youth and Family Services cases I find it difficult to explain to often very distraught parents who have had their children removed why in certain circumstances the department failed to protect them better than if they had been at home. In Dunedin where I am from we had children absconding and taking drugs. In Christchurch some children absconded out of the department’s care to prostitute themselves in the Square. We have also seen stupid mistakes made like putting children who have been abused into care with other children who are abusers. We need to have incredibly high standards. 
The Opposition would not be doing its job if it were not raising these issues as being important. As I said I do not believe for a moment that the Department of Child Youth and Family Services is responsible for these kids’ deaths. But who knows: it might have had an influence. If the risk had been assessed in a way that most New Zealand families would have liked then perhaps those girls might not have been in the care of that family at that time. I always remember Judge Mick Brown coming before our Social Services Committee. I asked him what one does when one sees intergenerational dysfunctionality in some families. 
He looked at the members of the committee and said: “Well frankly we have to come to terms with the fact that there are some families in this country that I wouldn’t leave my dog with.” I think that more often than not some children are left in situations where family violence has become normalised and accepted and in situations that most New Zealand parents would be very hard pressed to believe were good for children. 
There are a few ideas in this report that I think deserve better research. I am extremely disappointed that the Department of Child Youth and Family Services has dismissed the commissioner’s suggestion that the roopu teams be reviewed. I do not see the point in having separate services for Maori if they are going to be under-resourced understaffed and put under such immense pressure that they are on a hiding to nothing and will be in a position where they will fail the Maori children they are looking after. I do not see why the Department of Child Youth and Family Services ignores the commissioner’s recommendation that a review of resourcing be done immediately. 
I think it is also important to look at the whole issue of child protection teams. We all know that local people—local communities—have a better understanding of some of the families in need than some call-centre stuck in the middle of an urban centre where it has been unable to work closely with the families. We need to be able to look at local protection teams because if that had been the case perhaps some of these puzzle pieces would have been put together so that a full picture of the condition and care of these girls could have been established at the time.