Moroney Sue: Children Young Persons and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Moroney Sue: Children Young Persons and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:660;Page:9317] 
SUE MORONEY (Labour) 
: 
 I accept the invitation of the Government member Chester Borrows to make sure that we have a good debate on clauses 1 2 and 3 of the Children Young Persons and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Bill. I think we are really getting to the crux of the matter now. 
I particularly want to talk about the commencement date because I am interested in what it means for the Te Hurihanga facility based in Hamilton. If people have been following the debate they will know that this case really again demonstrates a difference between what the Government is proposing and what Labour believes is a really comprehensive approach to youth justice issues and youth crime. In Hamilton both Catholic Bishop Denis Browne and Anglican Archbishop David Moxon have come out calling for the Government to continue the funding of Te Hurihanga. I think the Hamilton community is looking at that decision and saying that on the one hand the Government is saying that it is wrong—it is the wrong model it is too expensive and we should shut it down—but on the other hand the two leading clerics in our city are saying that they want it kept open. Who is right in this debate? It is interesting that the Labour Party also sides on that side of the debate. I know which out of those choices I would put my faith in. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: Where’s the title? 
SUE MORONEY 
: The honourable member wants to hear what the bishops have to say and I am happy to oblige. They said: “This decision has been based on the belief that the cost of turning 16-year-old frequent offenders into good citizens outweighs the benefits of having young men fully functioning in society as family members workers and taxpayers”. The article that quoted them goes on to say: “The bishops were unimpressed by the Government’s replacement ‘Fresh Start’ policy due to be in place by October.” The reason that the bishops made a comment about being opposed to the Fresh Start policy starting in October was that that is what the Government has said it will replace the Te Hurihanga model with. The two principal clerics in our city were saying that they think it is the wrong approach. 
Let us have a look at the title of this bill. When I am talking to people about what this bill does and I mention its title they have no idea what it actually means. But when I say to them that it is the “Boot Camps Bill” then they understand. That is what people know the Fresh Start programme as. It is actually about boot camps. 
Hon Member 
: The Prime Minister called it that. John Key called it that. 
SUE MORONEY 
: John Key first labelled it as boot camps; in fact that is what it is about. People are not fooled. The people of Hamilton are asking why a programme that has been running in our city for 3 years as a pilot proven to work with the most serious and most difficult offenders— 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: What about the title? 
SUE MORONEY 
: I say to Mr Brownlee that I am talking about the commencement date: Te Hurihanga finishes in June and Fresh Start starts in October. What will happen in the intervening period? 
Not only that but what will happen come 1 October? I have heard three different versions. I have heard that that Te Hurihanga will be replaced with a programme where offenders go through a 12-month process. That is eight offenders going through a 12-month process. Members should remember that this is an 8-bed facility. Yet the Minister for Social Development and Employment is standing up at every opportunity and saying that it will deal with many many more offenders than it was and that is why the Government had to close down Te Hurihanga. But if only 8 offenders are to go through this programme for a year then where will it deal with those many many more—with the many many more that the Minister has promised? It cannot. Some people may say that we can shorten the programme so that it is only 2 months and then we will be able to push them through faster and we will get the numbers that the Minister wants. What will that achieve? It will not actually rehabilitate anybody. These young men have committed an average of 23 offences before they even walk through the door. If they are going to be pushed through in a matter of 2 or 3 months—