Mooney JosephJOSEPH MOONEY (National—Southland): Thank you very much Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of the National Party to speak on the Oranga Tamariki Amendment Bill. The National Party opposes this bill. The National Party brought in legislation that brought in the subsequent child removal policy which took effect in 2006. The then Minister the Hon Paula Bennett said at the third reading This legislation will also switch the onus on parents who have killed or severely abused or neglected a child and they'll now have to prove they are safe to parent subsequent children." So to be clear the law that is being partially repealed today is that currently a subsequent child is "any child born or unborn who has a parent who has been convicted of the murder manslaughter or infanticide of a child or young person in their care or custody; or who has had a previous child or young person removed from their care and there is no realistic prospect that the child or young person will be returned to [the person's] care." So it's quite a high threshold. Unfortunately New Zealand has a real problem with violence towards children in this country and unfortunately I have seen this in courts around the country where I have practised previously. I've seen it in Auckland I've seen it in the Bay of Plenty and I've seen it in the South Island in Christchurch and across the bottom of the South Island. There is a high rate unfortunately of abuse towards children. We need to put the best interests of children first to make sure that those children are cared for. There is also—and I've seen this numerous times in cases—a reluctance by those involved around the children whether it's family members or other agencies to raise the issues of children being abused. So it's actually quite difficult and it takes quite a few steps usually before something comes to the attention of the relevant agencies. And so we need to recognise that reality and we need to take steps to ensure that the children and their best interests are always taken into account first and we do what we can to ensure that they are looked after. New Zealand's a great country but we need to also face facts. It ranks 35th out of 41 developed countries in the wellbeing outcomes for children. Every eighth homicide victim in New Zealand from 2004 to 31 March 2019 was a child. New Zealand has the seventh highest rate of child homicide in the OECD. New Zealand also has the highest rate of teen suicide in the OECD. I make those points because this is a sober issue and one we have to really consider very very carefully. We all want to try to do the best thing. We want parents to be the best that they can and provide the best environment for their children and anyone else who has children in their vicinity. But we also have to recognise that we have a problem and that's what this subsequent child policy aimed to address: to provide a clear criteria. A high threshold needed to be set before a child could remain in their care. And just to repeat that again the part of it that will remain is that a subsequent child is one who has a parent who has been convicted of the murder manslaughter or infanticide of a child or young person in their care or custody.The second part which this bill is looking at removing or changing is where they had a previous child or young person removed from their care and there is no realistic prospect that the child or young person will be returned to the person's care. So we need to take into account when we consider this that if it has been determined that there's no realistic prospect that a child will be returned to a person's care can that person realistically be suitable to have another child in their care? It's something that we need to really take into account. The National Party isn't confident that the right approach has been taken here.There is also another issue around the dataset provisions in which there have been changes. This bill repeals section 66D. The dataset provision 66D of the Act came into effect on 1 July 2019 part of a suite of information-sharing provisions named in Part 2. Under that section any agency that creates a dataset from more than one source of information is required to publicly notify details of that dataset. The notification must include the types of information used in the combined datasets the source of those types of information the purpose or purposes served by creating or analysing the combined datasets and the privacy safeguards relating to the use of the combined datasets. Oranga Tamariki has found that the dataset provision could place an unnecessary administrative burden on child welfare and protection agencies without achieving the level of public accountability originally envisaged. In addition since 2016 when the original dataset provisions were proposed a number of initiatives across Government they say have effectively rendered the data redundant.However an alternative view is that this provision hasn't been adequately utilised and that it is a good provision to enable that information to be captured which can inform decision makers who have responsibilities to ensure the protection of children so they have the information that they need from a variety of different datasets to identify children who could or have been abused. There's an argument to be made that there needs to be more upskilling of those who would supply the information. Unfortunately—I won't say the name of the particular victim—there was a case not that long ago where a centre was aware of injuries to the child and didn't report them. There needs to be some consideration of how we address that situation rather than pulling back on the dataset provisions I would suggest.I certainly have seen unfortunately in my time practising that there are often a lot of little indicators that lead up to a serious crime of violence committed against a child. Those little indicators can build over time people can excuse them and say "Well it's not that bad" but then it just builds and builds then something really bad unfortunately happens. So we need to be able to pick up on those small indicators and those little warning signs those little warning flags before it gets to a serious stage. I would suggest that we need to actually look at how to improve this provision improve the ability of organisations to utilise that provision effectively to ensure we can pick up on those flags before it becomes a serious issue and children suffer.I would say that the National Party absolutely values children as I'm sure every single member of this House does. We deeply value the wellbeing and welfare of all New Zealand children and of all New Zealand children who have to unfortunately I would say end up in State care. I say unfortunately because ultimately we want children to be in a safe and caring environment among those who are their family and whānau—that is the ideal situation. We want everyone to be able to get there. The reality is unfortunately that we are not in that position and we do have parents who are unfortunately unable to properly take care of their children in this country. Those earlier statistics I quoted it's not things I'm happy to say because it's a sad moment it's a sad statistic for the country but it is one that we need to really have at the top of our mind I would suggest. It's not acceptable that New Zealand has the seventh highest rate of child homicide in the OECD. Underlying that is the serious damage being done to children before it gets to the point of homicide. There's unfortunately a very high rate of child abuse in this country.So that is the reality that we have to grapple with. We have to work out the best way to address that to improve the strength of families and the ability of parents to take proper care of their children. And we have to have the relevant law in place so we can ensure that the relevant agencies that are charged with taking care of children in cases where those who should be their caretakers are not able to—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yeah sorry speaker my apologies. There's been a leak of the clock and it's to your credit that you've been able to speak so nobly and with such good vocabulary for that time but actually I have to say to the speaker the time is up.Joseph Mooney: Thank you Mr Speaker.DEPUTY SPEAKER: But well done carrying on."