Costello CaseyHon CASEY COSTELLO (NZ First): I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak in support of the Family Proceedings (Dissolution for Family Violence) Amendment Bill. I thank the Hon Dr Deborah Russell for bringing this bill to the House. I also would commend Hūhana Lyndon for her commentary and I will make sure that I tell Mum that we did agree in the House and she will stop yelling at me for not being nice to you—she gave me very strict instructions that we had to find reasons to agree.Hūhana Lyndon: Thanks Auntie Maryann.Hon CASEY COSTELLO: New Zealand First stands firm on principles of fairness and justice and the protection of all New Zealanders. We are deeply committed to addressing family violence and supporting victims. We also want to prioritise ensuring that our legal processes are fair balanced and do not erode the rights of any party involved.I've spoken in this House previously about my experience in the Police. I was in the front line in the 1980s dealing with a process of change as we went through the family proceedings legislation and the continuing tweaking and adjusting of orders as we started to better and more clearly confront what violence was to our communities.Unfortunately the reality is the dissolution of a marriage does not always end the control. The protection order will remain in place; the level of control will exist. I recall we realised that one of the changes in the reality of women was that occupation orders and trespass orders weren't enough because a woman that I dealt with—after we got her out of the house the husband went in and set fire to all her clothes and all her personal belongings and we could not prosecute him for anything because it was marital property. We have to then keep adjusting and modifying the way we respond to domestic violence.But over last week I had the pleasure of travelling around the country and meeting with front-line social services front-line workers that were doing their bit to try and address family violence in a practical way. We know we need to put protections in place. But we also know we need to fix broken people—that there are men who have no concept of what a loving relationship looks like. They don't know anything but violence and therefore create violence. So when we deal with these issues I think we have to have a balanced conversation and give an opportunity to be able to rebuild relationships. We have to fix broken people protect our whānau and protect vulnerable children and maybe sometimes we have a chance of rebuilding a family.So when New Zealand First looked at this legislation although we support it wholeheartedly and recognise the importance of putting these protections in place we still think we need to address some concerns around the unintended consequences that might occur. That's why we look to the committee of the whole House to really have those discussions and make sure we are considering where there may be unintended consequences. From my perception the risk is that when you make the protection order a permanent protection order and that is the opportunity to dissolve a relationship then we're moving the urgency the desperation to a point of the protection order. Is there a risk we will create more contested protection orders? Is there a risk that we will move up or speed up the level of desperation and pressure?We're not opposing this legislation but we hope that as we move forward we can consider whether there are some things we need to do. I think that I have dealt with men who have done horrible things but they have felt horrible and destroyed and in some circumstances have ended their own lives. I think we still need to keep the open door to fixing family violence by reducing violence. And yes we balance that with putting protections in place but I hope as we go into the committee of the whole House we look at this holistically and understand that there may be opportunities to save families there may be opportunities to fix broken relationship there may be opportunities to talk to those who know nothing but violence and give them hope to rebuild a relationship. In some instances that two years can be that opportunity. As much as I would like to think that the dissolution of a civil union or a marriage would put the vulnerable person in a state of protection we know that doesn't always occur and that a dissolution in some circumstances is an escalation of the level of need for control.So I hope that as we have work through the committee of the whole House we consider whether there are things that we've missed. Because I understand what it was like on the front line when every time we passed a legislation that we thought would help vulnerable women we ended up creating another problem we ended up creating more desperation and more urgency. So rather than implementing orders just ending relationships maybe there is some balance we can put into this protection process.The other risk is that we end up with protection orders being used as an opportunity to manipulate a system and use it to speed up a relationship ending. We would love to think that all women are beyond reproach that we never lie and we never manipulate but unfortunately my experience is that isn't always the case. As we create a rush for protection orders to end marriages do we end up trampling on genuine victims who are lost in the noise? Do we end up risking desensitising ourselves to the seriousness and importance of a protection order? I just hope that as we work through this process we continue this agreement round the House we continue to look at the ways this legislation can be balanced and ensure we are achieving exactly what we want it to achieve which is creating protections.But I have genuine concern as I meet with the front-line workers that are so desperately working with our young men—men who are fathers at the age of 15; men who have never known a loving bonding relationship—that maybe when we take that relationship away and we close the door we are closing the door on them being able to be fixed.I just hope that when we work through this process we have a bigger picture in mind. I know how desperately horrible it is for women who are vulnerable. I know the horror of young children trapped in violent relationships. But I've also had the absolute joy of seeing relationships saved and the corner turned. I've seen the men who didn't know any better suddenly becoming loving fathers. Once they've cleaned up their act they've received the mental health services they need once they have solved their addiction problems once they have fixed their desperation they have turned into good fathers and good men making good families. I just really hope that we can as we work through this do that balanced conversation that we need to have and make sure that what we pass here is going to deliver exactly what we're asking for: the protection for women who are vulnerable protection for any person who is vulnerable in a controlling relationship.But at the same time please let us ensure we do not shut the door on people who need desperate help so that we can actually start breaking the cycle of violence fix our broken men fix our broken families and actually put an end to domestic violence. I commend this bill to the House and I hope we proceed with really good conversations moving forward. Thank you Speaker.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh): This is a split call. I call Tamatha Paul.