Upston LouiseHon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō): Thank you Mr Speaker. I want to thank the Hon Dr Duncan Webb the Minister resuming his seat for outlining some of the intent behind the Social Workers Registration Legislation Amendment Bill but what was clearly lacking in it was the explanation of why a four-year extension is required. So I just want to take members of the House and those who are following the Social Workers Registration Legislation Amendment Bill debate back a bit because improvements in social work have been something that has crossed over Governments of both persuasions over the years; in effect starting back in 2003 when the legislation was first put in. It's all around ensuring the safety of the public and enhancing the professionalism of social workers and then during National's time when Anne Tolley was the Minister in charge it then moved towards mandatory registration. So it has been a long time in coming. The legislation introduced by Anne Tolley was introduced in 2017 and it passed in 2019. But I want to bring back to the House some of the reasons why this mandatory registration was seen to be so important because that is a big part of my questioning around why it is an extension of four years. We do know that social workers across New Zealand work in health work in justice work in education work in social services and child protection—they work with some of our most vulnerable New Zealanders and the work they do is just so critical. So part of the move to make social workers' registration mandatory was recognising that it was about lifting the skills and the professionalism of the sector. Actually having spoken at the Social Service Providers Aotearoa conference last week the common feedback is just the level of complexity that New Zealanders are presenting with now and I think that reinforces why that requirement is for mandatory registration. Increasingly social workers are dealing with children young people adults and families with complex high needs. That was identified when the legislation was introduced in 2017. I think that if you roll forward from there over the last couple of years and now what we're seeing in recent months—and this is currently being faced by some parts of the country today—are weather events that are providing even greater challenges. So there is a need for social workers—full stop. I accept the fact that there is a challenge in terms of the supply of social workers but also we must hold fast to continuing to increase the skills and professionalism. One of the things that was enabled by the mandatory registration process is ongoing development and I want to also acknowledge the Social Workers Registration Board. They did significant work at the time when the kind of registration deadline approached and that was 2021. The law was introduced in 2017 it was passed in 2019 then the voluntary registration expired and became mandatory in 2021 and then there was the experience pathway available up until 2024 and so I haven't heard a sufficient argument yet in terms of why there is an extension of four years. I have some suspicions. One of the suspicions one of my colleagues perhaps wouldn't be surprised about and that is the state of vocational education and the massive reform that's under way. I wonder if that's had an impact. I wonder if that's been a contributing factor in terms of those not taking that pathway for the qualification route. So I might keep my suspicion for another day on that way—my colleague Penny Simmonds is nodding. But while we always accepted that the experience pathway is a valid and important pathway I'm not sure why—even if it did require an extension—it needs to be for four years. That's a very long time from now and I think there are still multiple challenges that aren't addressed by this legislation. The pay equity I think will be a significant step but it does feel as if it's taking for ever and I know that for those who are working in the sector—I think about some that I met with just last week—they are tired and they are feeling very under pressure. One of the things that is adding extra pressure is the ongoing red tape and bureaucracy that the current Government is imposing upon them and so I wondered if part of the conversation instead of just pushing out the deadline for this pathway for four years would be to actually look at some of the things that get in the way. It was a shocking figure: 55 percent of social workers' time is spent doing admin—55 percent. Now if I think about it and I'm picturing a whole range of faces of social workers that I know in my electorate and across those that I come into contact with in my portfolio responsibilities—man they provide magic. They do magic in their communities. To spend 55 percent of their time doing admin does seem quite a waste. But anyway this pathway being extended for four years is I think concerning. I wonder if some of it is just another element of non-delivery where the Government didn't get on and do what they needed to do and that may well have been to encourage and support more to take the academic route or to look at a more vocationally based blended training model for apprenticeships which we know work so well in other areas. Instead what we have is the request of the Government to extend it for four years and it says basically that it's because of the pay equity settlement of which we have no idea. Does that mean the pay equity settlement will be four years away? Goodness I hope not. It's only at stage four of 10 stages so four years does seem a long way away. The social worker workforce supply and demand pressures—the comment in the statement from the Minister was that it's been exacerbated by COVID-19. I think it's fair to say that it existed before COVID-19. It's not necessarily a new problem and even if you said OK it's exacerbated by COVID-19." then maybe the logical extension would be for two years. But again the extension that the Government want to put through today is four years. The other one is this—and I do want to acknowledge the work that kaimahi do around the country but I wouldn't have thought that it was a new issue in terms of ensuring equitable pathways for kaimahi to be registered social workers. So again it seems as if this issue has been blown up a bit. It was an issue when the legislation was introduced in 2017. Part of having the experience pathway in place was to absolutely recognise the people that have worked in our communities not just for 10 or 15 years but for 20 30 40 years in many cases and to make sure that through the mandatory registration we didn't lose them from the social work profession. But it is important also that part of that mandatory registration is having all social workers having to meet appropriate standards and undertake ongoing professional development as part of renewing their annual practising certificate. So it's not just kind of getting to the line; it's actually making sure that the social workers are supported and as I've said before given the complexity that many of the social workers are increasingly facing I think that those elements are incredibly important. So I do think the four-year extension case hasn't been put to the Parliament today. We will be supporting this legislation with reservations and the other obvious reservation—which we will get to—is: why on earth yet again is Labour ramming through another piece of legislation with a shortened report-back? If the extension is for four years and the deadline for this expires in 2024 why is it that they insist on ramming it through and doing it without the full process?"