Dyson RuthHon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills): Thank you for the opportunity to make a contribution in this debate. Can I begin by acknowledging both Ron Mark and Ria Bond and saying that it is not easy to tell a story of a family that you do not have a lot of time for in terms of the way they behaved. That is a very courageous thing and is a significant contribution to this debate. But can I also say to both of my colleagues from New Zealand First that violence and an inability to properly support children is not limited to brown people. There are thousands and thousands of Pākehā families in our country who seriously abuse or murder or neglect their children. This is not about parents who are not able to support their families; it is about what this entire legislation should be—that is how do we get the best outcomes for every child who is born in our country? Let me refer the Minister to the evidence on that. She will have read it I am sure in her preparation for this legislation coming to the House. The best outcomes for a child happen when they are born into a family regardless of whether there are one or two parents and regardless of the parents' gender that wants that child—not necessarily planned but wanted. That is an important step. The next one is that that family has enough money to support the family that they live in a home that is warm and dry and where they have security of tenure and they can afford to pay the rent or the mortgage that one of the parents has a job that pays a fair wage and that as the baby gets older they are able to access affordable high-quality early childhood education and top-quality free public education in their own community. That is the start of building the best contributor to New Zealand that we could ever want for every baby who is born and there is nothing in this bill that does anything towards that. There is a lot that the current Government is doing that undermines that. I think that is a real tragedy because we have in this the first new piece of Child Youth and Family protection legislation we have had since the late 1980s a huge opportunity to learn from the past look at the barriers that we have and say that we can make a real difference. This Parliament could make a real difference in the lives of every child born in our country. We have just missed that opportunity and I think that is a shame. I know that the Minister has got every good intention at heart but you know she maybe did not have the backing of her colleagues or maybe did not have the ability to be bold and visionary. I know that the Social Services Committee worked really hard on this. I know that every member of Parliament who has debated it has worked really hard on it. But we missed an opportunity and maybe we might be able to take it in the near future. There are two things that I think are missing. First of all there is the topic that has been debated a lot tonight. There is overwhelming evidence both in New Zealand and internationally that if babies and children and young people stay connected to the safe elements within their family they have better outcomes. The family that they are placed with if their own parents cannot look after them has to be safe. You know for any member to imply that we would be putting kids in an unsafe environment is just dumb. No member of this Parliament would want to do that. No member of any party in this Parliament would do that. The more connected a child or a young person stays with the safe part of their family the better the outcome is. That principle should be in this legislation because we have seen what has happened in New Zealand for goodness' sake and heaven alone if we look across to Australia we can see what happens when you have a culture that thinks it is superior to another one and therefore thinks kids are better placed with people who are not members of their family and who just happen to be white actually. That is what happened in Australia. That is what happened in the past in New Zealand and we should never commit that crime again. We should never deny children the basis of their identity. Of course children have to be safe. That has always been the founding principle of this—[Bell rung] Mr Chairman. The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): The Hon Ruth Dyson. Hon RUTH DYSON: I was not sure whether you were hoping my voice would give up completely or not Mr Chairman but it is not going to. We should never deny children a connection with their identity—and the stronger that connection can be the better—and we should never ever allow the children who are the Ron Marks and the Ria Bonds of today to be in violent situations either and we can do both of those things. We can do them better than we have done in the past. So that connection with your family regardless of whether you are Māori or Pasifika or Chinese or New Zealand - born Pākehā makes a difference. The second part is the issue I referred to earlier and that is the environment in which we bring up the children. Where in this legislation does it link that vision that the Minister talked about of early intervention—of actually getting in early with a family to better support them to raise in a healthy environment their child? How can they do that when there is nothing in this that triggers early intervention and support? There is nothing about the link with truancy services. There is nothing about the link with affordable housing. There is nothing about the link with employment or with support for travel. All the things that make people's lives possible and make them able to better raise a child—nothing in this legislation does that. So there is no point talking about early intervention if we see exactly the same threshold for intervention as in any other care and protection case which is that the child is in harm. That is too late Minister. I know that the Minister supports early intervention. Well let us see it reflected in the responsibilities of Oranga Tamariki and in the legislation that we are debating. Let us make sure that children are born into warm dry homes that they have a family income that supports them that one of their parents has a job that earns a fair wage and that those children are connected to quality early childhood centres and a community school that gives them the best chance at education. Another thing we might want to throw in just for icing on the cake—we know that kids who are born in poor families do not have computers at home so they miss out. The Minister used to be the Minister of Education. She will be well aware of that point and she knows how much further behind kids are in the education system if they come from a poor family and do not have a computer in their home. They miss out on a whole lot of educational opportunities that other kids have. What is the biggest way to improve the outcomes in the quality of life for a New Zealand baby? It is to offer them the best education possible. Nothing in this legislation gives us that—nothing at all. So Minister I want to reinforce the comment that Jacinda Ardern made and that was to congratulate you on the change in the youth justice age. It is overdue. You have done it. It would not have been easy I imagine with some of your colleagues but that step was taken. You won and I think that is a thing to your credit. It will be your legacy in this portfolio. We should have inserted in this legislation the requirement to deliver a proper standard of living for every child. That is a responsibility for the New Zealand Government to then deliver through a multitude of agencies. It would actually break the cycle. It would actually remove poverty as the driver of so many of the negative outcomes that it causes in our current society. The gap between rich and poor is getting bigger so the challenges that people in low-income families face— Hon Tim Macindoe: Not according to the evidence. Hon RUTH DYSON: —are increasing and are getting more and more. We know the statistics Mr Macindoe. Tragically—Hon Tim Macindoe: No not according to the evidence. Hon RUTH DYSON: It is not a political debate; it is a factual debate. There are parts of this legislation that are very good but unfortunately the fundamentals that will make a difference—the fundamentals that are evidence-based about what will give us the best outcome in a care and protection and early intervention system—are missing. So I am sad that we will be opposing this legislation. It is an opportunity that is missed for our country. It is an opportunity that is missed for future generations of our babies.