Newman Muriel: Social Workers Registration Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Newman Muriel: Social Workers Registration Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4867] 
Dr MURIEL NEWMAN (ACT NZ) 
: 
 I would also like to make a couple of comments about the title of the bill. My colleague Katherine Rich’s idea of calling the bill the “Social Workers Voluntary Registration Bill” is a very good one. It certainly reflects what this bill is all about and does not put anybody in the situation of believing that this bill means what the Minister’s title says. I did think that a more colourful way of saying it would be to call the bill the “Social Workers (Clayton’s Registration) Bill”. I think that that would again explain to people just what this Government is up to with this bill. The point is that the way the title is worded would give people confidence that something is happening in the industry when it is not—in other words give confidence that is not warranted. 
I would like the Minister to take a call. I hope he is not going to sit through the whole Committee stage and not rise to his feet and explain a few things that we will be raising. I want him to explain what he really wants to achieve by putting this bill into our legislative programme. In particular I want to ask him what changed his mind from deciding that he would require or ask all his statutory social workers to become registered. What caused him to change his mind; to say no that he is not going to put that requirement on them that he is going to leave registration to them so that it remains voluntary? I want the Minister to tell the Committee whether it was the cost—$2.3 million a year over 12 years which works out at about $30 million. 
If the Minister does not take a call then the Committee has to assume that he is not prepared to invest in his staff particularly in the Department of Child Youth and Family Services. We have to assume that he is not prepared for that department to take a lead in social work registration in the country; and that he does not believe in his heart in raising professional standards because it seems he is not prepared to invest in the staff. Unless the Minister takes a call I am afraid that will be the conclusion the Committee has to reach and it will be the conclusion that New Zealand will reach. So I do implore the Minister to explain to us why he changed his mind. 
The other point of concern is the Social Workers Registration Board. Again I would like the Minister to explain to the Committee how we will know that the board is not going to be made up of Labour Party hacks—candidates who did not make it and people who are friends of the Labour Party. How can the Minister assure us that that board will be well representative of the profession and that its members will not simply be the Government’s lapdogs. We do know that this is a Government that likes to preserve its power. The honourable member Nick Smith mentioned Kit Richards who was one of the first people in the public sector to stand up for a cause that he believed in. And boy did he get guillotined as quickly as anything! The Minister of Social Services and Employment has made it clear that he is in control of the board so does this mean that that Minister will have control of the whole social work profession? That is what I believe is intended unless the Minister takes a call and explains to us that we are interpreting this wrongly. 
It is a very serious business if we have political control of a profession driven through Parliament when only a very small proportion of that profession works in the public sector and a great many people in the profession work in the private sector. What we do not want in this country is for political control to go beyond the realm in which it should exist. 
The other point I would like to raise is in respect of clause 7 which relates to overseas-qualified social workers. Clause 7 has a whole lot of provisions whereby those people will be able to work in New Zealand. We all know the plight of overseas-trained doctors who come to New Zealand full of hope after being told by the Immigration Service that they will be able to work in this country only to find that they cannot work. What we do not want is for people overseas to say to themselves: “Well New Zealand I’m a trained social worker. I’ve got heaps of experience—years of it. I’d like to come and work in this country.” only to hear that they will be able to come to New Zealand but cannot practise.