Turei Metiria: Care of Children Bill Status of Children Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Turei Metiria: Care of Children Bill Status of Children Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:621;Page:16721] 
METIRIA TUREI (Green) 
: 
 The Greens are pleased to support the third readings of this legislation. The purpose of the legislation was to review and update the Guardianship Act and that review was certainly needed. In our view the changes in the bills are not highly radical but rather refine and clarify the purpose of such legislation. The Greens supported this legislation with clause 37 still in it. We consider that the current law is working well and does not need to be changed. We are concerned that that clause is only one of a number of issues in legislation that has other issues that are at least as important but have been largely ignored by other politicians. 
The Greens are strong supporters of the view that all children deserve equal recognition and protection of the law regardless of the gender status of their parents. For example even where a partner is active in the decision to have a child his or her status under current law is undermined and the child does not have parents with equal recognised legal status. One example is that under this legislation the father of a child is an automatic guardian where he has lived with the mother at any time from the conception of the child to the child’s birth. That extends the current time frame within which fathers can obtain automatic joint guardianship and it will provide much greater certainty of parental responsibility where the parents’ relationship is fleeting but none the less the father wants to have legal recognition of his responsibilities to his child. 
Another example of the new provisions relates to assisted human reproduction to ensure that the child’s parents those who have accepted and sought responsibility for that child have the consequent legal recognition. The existing provisions in family law do not recognise the parental status of the same-sex partner even if that partner is in a long-term relationship with the mother before during and after the child is born. For so many New Zealand children especially those who came to the select committee those new provisions will provide enormous benefit for them. 
We are especially pleased to see that the legislation provides a process for the recognition of agreements between parents about contact with and upbringing of children conceived using assisted human reproduction. It is critical that those agreements can be enforced so that those who have actively chosen to become parents who have made a lifetime commitment to a child are assured of legal protection. This is especially so where the parents are in same-sex relationships which already suffer from serious discrimination. 
So many children are born without thought or preplanning as to their care. So where that planning and commitment is made surely it is in the best interests of the child the family and the community to have those agreements enforced. 
In our view the Family Court process has changed significantly as well; we are pleased that the court is now more open but there is still a presumption that the court process is not available to the whole of the public for general consumption and entertainment. For example family members or support persons—such as Rape Crisis volunteers—who attend any pre-court mediations or counselling can also attend the court hearings. This is especially important where the person or persons are actively involved in the child’s life and have a stake in the decisions made by the court or in circumstances where one of the parties is in need of support. The court retains the power to exclude people so there is still good protection in place where for example there may be intimidation. We also accept that the provisions allow accredited media to attend and are tempered by the controls on the reporting of cases so as to protect the identity of the parties. 
One major advantage in this legislation is the time limits now imposed on ex parte orders. Those are orders made on application by one party without notification to the other. Often ex parte orders are critical for the welfare and safety of the child or for some other person. Ex parte orders must be retained as a tool for the court. But the legislation now imposes a time limit on those orders. Firstly the order will expire 1 year after it is made. Secondly the court must assign within 3 months a hearing date to consider whether a final order should be substituted for the ex parte order. Thirdly the non-notified parent can request a hearing for a final order and that hearing must occur within 42 days of that person’s giving notice to the court. The tightening-up of the ex parte order process is a significant step for all those who need to access the courts for emergencies and for those sorts of issues but it is still important that an ex parte order does not persist beyond the specific circumstances that led to it and that the range of issues raised in respect of an ex parte order can be properly explored by all the affected parties. 
We are pleased to see that the appointment of step-parents as guardians has some safeguards. The first is that both biological parents make any additional appointments. This makes sure that the parents are fully aware of who may be acquiring parental responsibilities for their child. The step-parent is not eligible as a guardian if he or she has been convicted of any offence involving harm to a child—including violence ill-treatment or deprivation—or any offence involving child pornography. The step-parent must also declare his or her criminal history as part of the guardianship application. The clean-slate legislation does not apply to these applications. This is very important because along with the disqualifying criminal offences parents must know as much as possible about the person who will take on those responsibilities—critical as they are—for their children. 
The Greens supported CCS’s concerns about the non-medical sterilisation of young disabled girls. Many such sterilisations occur when the young girl is very young and in our view this constitutes an abrogation of her fundamental human right to control and manage her own reproduction. This legislation does not clarify the situation for the non-medical sterilisation of young girls but that matter was canvassed in the Justice and Electoral Committee and in the Committee stage and we look forward to continuing to work with the Government on this issue. 
Finally no system of law can fix all the problems that arise within families. It is always a hard and horrible process trying to resolve such personal and emotional issues within a strict legal framework. This legislation puts children at the centre of that process and in that sense at least provides a very good model for how legislation should be considered by this House in the future. The Greens commend this legislation to the House.