Stewart Barbara: Families Commission Bill — Third Reading 
Stewart Barbara: Families Commission Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10688] 
BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) 
: 
 It is with a degree of sadness that I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak in this third reading of the Families Commission Bill. It is sadness as this is a model of a Families Commission that will never save one child in this country and will not deliver what is required for the children and the families of New Zealand. I think that all of us in this House looked forward to this legislation because we recognise that the strength of the family is the foundation of our nation. New Zealand First has said on many many occasions that the quality of the future that we leave to our children will be determined by the quality of the children that we leave to that future and the quality of those children is determined by the quality of family relationships. 
We absolutely support some of those ideas that were mentioned by the Minister about the strengthening of the family and how important the family is for the future of the nation. We support that but this Families Commission is a bureaucracy that cannot and will not deliver what is required for the children and families of New Zealand. The bottom line is that this legislation is flawed and it will return to this House. In its election manifesto United Future talked about establishing a commission for the family. Among its many roles it would provide a family mediation service that would support promote and develop the provision of marriage and relationship counselling services. Then there is this legislation where none of that is mentioned. 
United Future members have said at previous stages that this is their vision. This afternoon the people of New Zealand will see that this commission is a nightmare—a $28 million nightmare. It must be noted in the records that opposition to this legislation has elicited the most incredibly vitriolic response from United Future. We have seen press releases that were totally erroneous and the leader of that party wrote to each of the submitters stating that their views were totally ignored by the Opposition. This is totally inane unprofessional behaviour. All submitters were listened to and questioned by the committee and due process was followed in our select committee. It was a totally disappointing performance from the party that prides itself on bringing common sense into politics. If that is the sort of common sense United Future brings into politics I am totally disappointed with those members. 
New Zealand First has made no secret of the fact that we would have supported without reservation a Families Commissioner that worked in with the Children’s Commissioner. We all know that that organisation is working as an advocate for one of the most important elements of the family—children. It is working very successfully too. That organisation has a proven track record and additional resources could have strengthened up its office and it would not have required $28 million either. The $28 million that was required to set up this Families Commission as was pointed out by my colleague Judith Collins could have been better spent on more practical help for families than will be provided by this Families Commission. Organisations like Plunket Early Start programmes and other community groups that were working in the areas of parental support could also have been used. I must say that United Future agrees with that. These organisations already have a proven track record. They are of great assistance to families and they are successful. Some of this funding could have been given to some of these groups. 
Practical help is required—rather than research which this Families Commission is going to carry out. There is already a lot of research carried out even by the Ministry of Social Development on New Zealand families. We already know what is required for successful families. The resilience factor I think is mentioned in this legislation. Things like quality housing health care adequate nutrition education employment a loving family and two committed loving parents are required. As has already been pointed out meeting all these needs is absolutely paramount. Why do we have to spend $28 million to prove what we already know? 
There are a whole number of areas in this bill that make it totally impossible to support. United Future received some of its electoral support—I know some of this from the worm as well—because of its focus on families; families that were easily definable by most New Zealanders. It is very evident that United Future was speaking with a forked tongue about families and consequently has gone from a hero to a zero rating in the estimation of many people. Even the submitters have contacted us on this issue as well. 
New Zealand First put forward in the Committee stage a definition of “family” that would have been accepted by most New Zealanders. But guess what? United Future voted it down. My colleague Peter Brown will speak further on that. We also have some grave concerns about the number of commissioners who will be part of this commission. 
Judith Collins 
: How many? 
BARBARA STEWART 
: There will be three full-time commissioners and three part-time commissioners. United Future told us last week that these roles have already been advertised. There were hundreds of requests for applications. I do not know how many United Future MPs have applied as yet. Next time around perhaps! The total irony and the total arrogance that is shown here is absolutely astounding. It shows how much notice United Future was ever going to take of any contributions from anybody in this House in the Committee stage. Everybody here wants to achieve something while he or she is in Parliament. All I can say is that the legacy of a huge bureaucracy that United Future members want to create has turned their heads. Common sense has gone out of the door. 
This House has not even passed the legislation and already United Future members have raced ahead with advertising for these roles. One must now ask what their role will be in the selection of these family commissioners. Pride always comes before a fall. It is unfortunate that this is going to be a very expensive fall. The cumbersome structure and the duplication of tasks that are undertaken by other agencies will ensure that the goals of this commission and the lofty purpose outlined in this bill will never be realised. It will never be achieved at all. It is totally ironic that at a time when we know more about the family and its dysfunction than we have ever known we pass legislation that will assist in ensuring that there is just as much dysfunction. 
This commission cannot advocate for anybody. The Children’s Commissioner has always been able to advocate for children yet this commission cannot even do that. It cannot talk about any problems that certain families are experiencing whether it be solo parent families nuclear families or problems that grandparents are having with their grandchildren. The commission cannot advocate for those particular groups. 
What will we get? We will get a very generalised message that will not mean a lot to anybody. It cannot be everything to everyone. We can only hope now that this Families Commission because it will come into being can achieve something worthwhile. We doubt it. New Zealand First will look forward to monitoring the outcomes of this $28 million talkfest and ensuring that the commission’s performance is efficient and effective as is outlined in this particular legislation. It is for all these reasons that New Zealand First will not be supporting this bill.