Henare PeeniHon PEENI HENARE (Minister for Youth): Tēnā koe Madam Deputy Speaker. If the House will indulge me just very briefly—in farewelling a good man by the name of Bill Wiki from Ōtara; a staunch Labour Party member but more importantly a community stalwart. I will farewell him in Māori first and I'll link this to the rest of my contribution on this particular bill.Nō reira e te Pāpā e Wīremu whakangaro atu rā koe ki a rātou kua ngaro atu ki te pō—i oti i a koe ngā mahi rangatira ki roto i a Ō Taramainuku hei tutuki hei hāpai i ngā mahi me ngā wawata o te hapori o Ōtara. I mate koe i aituangia koe ki roto o Ōtara engari i tukuna atu te taone o Tāmaki-makau-rau i tō tinana ki tō wā kāinga ki roto i a āu o Ngāti Hine. Kotahi te kōrero ki a koe e te papa: haere mai haere.[And so we farewell you elder statesman Wīremu as you join those who are no longer with us—you who achieved great things amongst Ō Taramainuku so that the aspirations of the Ōtara community might be realised and advanced. Even though the accident that took your life happened in Ōtara the wider Auckland region recognised that your remains must return to your people of Ngāti Hine. Only one thing remains to be said dear sir: farewell.]Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker for allowing me to farewell Bill Wiki. I mention Bill Wiki because Bill Wiki was a staunch man in the community of Ōtara. Bill Wiki was a big family man. Bill Wiki would take young mainly male Māori and Pacific Islanders off the street and into his home. He would take them into his home because these kids had nowhere else to go. They didn't have families they could go home to and eat meat and vegetables for dinner and sleep in a nice warm bed. These were street kids—many of them hardened street kids. He took them in out of the goodness of his heart.Sadly when I read a particular bill like this I can't help but think about Bill Wiki. The reason is that some of the orders that can be imposed by the introduction of a bill like this actually stop the good heart of Bill Wiki for his community. They actually say to him that because of the actions of one the multiple kids that were taken into his home shall be punished for it. Why? Because it says that if one particular bad apple tends to play up because of the order placed on Bill Wiki by the court then all of the other kids would miss out.This doesn't take into consideration the dynamics in a community such as Ōtara where cultural disconnection is a real thing where family disconnection is a real thing where tribal disconnection is a real thing and where church disconnection is a real thing amongst Māori and Pacific Island communities.So I want to remember Bill Wiki as we contribute towards this bill. It is important to make sure that the approach we take—and I take the point of the member whose name is on this particular bill. We do want the right outcome for our families; not a punitive one. We want the right outcome for our families—one that is whānau ora - centric one that puts the family at the centre of all we do in making sure that young people get the support and the care that they need to be successful in this country.I'm sad to say that in this particular bill it doesn't achieve that. It takes a very staunch punitive approach and I'm not surprised by that given the bills in the House this evening. The Psychoactive Substances (Increasing Penalty for Supply and Distribution) Amendment Bill is another one that while well intended looks to solve a particular problem but if anything creates more problems. It also contributes to the well-known fact in the public—that it was the former regime that actually was quite happy to build prisons and now we know why. Because bills like this actually look to punish families.Let's look at the whānau dynamic. In many whānau across my electorate of Tāmaki Makaurau—and this isn't unique to Tāmaki Makaurau—the whānau dynamic is very different. I've spoken about Matua Bill and I know that many grandparents actually find themselves inheriting—whether it was by force of law or by the good nature of the grandparent—more than one child. They inherit families; they inherit all of their grandkids in one go.Sure we might be able to point the finger at absent parents absent mums and dads and blame them for the culture and the behaviour and the delinquency of these young people. But I'd argue that this particular bill actually doesn't focus on the young person. My experience in my communities is that when grandparents take in their grandchildren they do it with the acknowledgment that the parent is actually absent. They have other issues—mental health issues addiction issues.The last thing we want to be doing is locking these people up—whether it's the parent with the mental health issue the alcohol or substance abuse issue or just the hard fact of living in the current environment where expenses are far too high. They struggle. They work hard. They try their best to raise a family but just can't do it because times are hard.This particular bill sets out to punish those kinds of people and even worse sets out to punish the grandparents who are actually filling that role of looking after their family keeping whānau together. I recall in the last parliamentary term that was what one of the focuses was. It was about keeping whānau together. Sadly what this particular bill does is it doesn't do that.I want to touch on another aspect that isn't unique to Tāmaki Makaurau but is certainly heightened in Tāmaki Makaurau and that is a housing crisis.DEPUTY SPEAKER: I'd rather you talked about the bill.Hon PEENI HENARE: Yes Madam Deputy Speaker it talks about one of the imposable conditions in this particular bill. It requires parents or guardians to reside at a nominated address with the child or young person. Many children and young people actually live on couches. They live in sheds. They don't have a fixed abode. They travel around their friends' places they sleep on the couch until their mother or father or the guardians of that particular house kick them out. Are we suggesting then that we can impose upon parents who struggle in the same way—we need not look past Te Puea Marae all of the emergency housing places in Tāmaki Makaurau. Are we expecting parents to actually find themselves all of a sudden in a house where they can be there with this particular young person to care for them? I reiterate the point: there is a housing crisis.I want to touch too on the comments made by the member around the advice from the Attorney-General who makes it very clear that this is a breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. This is a clear breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. While we might take the point from the member who introduced this bill in saying that sure we can flesh out the well-intended purposes of this bill through another stage through the select committee and through other readings and processes in this House but the fact remains that this is in the words of the Attorney-General still a serious breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act—on multiple levels; not just on one level but on multiple levels.I'd argue then that this particular bill as has been mentioned numerous times in the House this evening is well intended but poorly drafted—poorly drafted without consideration of the realities of whānau the realities of young people a prison system bulging in fact bursting at the seams and social factors that are affecting communities. They simply aren't being considered in this particular bill. And of course that's not good enough. What we hope to see in a particular bill of this nature is one that does actually focus on the family. Pūao-te-ata-tū is a classic example. It's a great piece of work that can advise bills like this and that actually puts a whānau-centred approach on these types of bills to make sure that we're not taking a punitive approach but one that says actually the young person is a part of a whānau and it is a wider whānau. It might not be the guardian or the actual biological parents but they're part of a wider community. What this particular bill does and I'm sad to say is it doesn't do that.In fact I'd argue it would break the family down. It would cause more strain on a service that simply cannot take any more punishment. I'm talking about the prison system. I'm talking about the social welfare system. I'm talking about all of the public services that our communities expect to be there but simply can't cope. This bill will simply add a further burden on that particular public service let alone the arguments about whether or not something like this can actually be policed—can actually be policed.In the closing seconds of my contribution we on this side of the House the Labour Party will be opposing this bill and we would encourage the member to think a bit wider in drafting a bill of such nature in the hope that it may pass in the future. Kia ora tātou.