Stewart Barbara: Families Commission Bill — First Reading 
Stewart Barbara: Families Commission Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5628] 
BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) 
: 
 I take this call on the bill with a huge amount of disappointment. New Zealand First will not be supporting this bill. New Zealand First is aware that many New Zealanders had really high hopes for this commission but with this bill their hopes are dashed. As we have all heard today strong families cannot be legislated for as is outlined in this bill. 
New Zealand First is a family-friendly party as are all the parties in this House and we recognise the importance of the early years of development and the strength of the family. New Zealand First recognised this and did something about it when it was in coalition Government by ensuring that there was free medical care for all children aged under six—something that we hear is now being gradually eroded away. We were attempting to ensure that the youngest most vulnerable members of our families were kept healthy—something that does strengthen families. New Zealand First knows the importance of the family for the development of children and believes that programmes that provide families with support and guidance to ensure a safe and healthy environment are absolutely essential for our families within New Zealand. 
Does this bill do that? No. This commission is duplication and increased bureaucracy. As has already been said a huge amount of family-focused research was undertaken by the Ministry of Social Development—a function also to be undertaken by this commission. So why duplicate this bureaucracy? The role of this Families Commission’s bureaucracy is so nebulous that it has to become all things to all people. What does that do for a Crown entity? It is easy to be a jack of all trades and master of none. That is what this commission is set up to become. 
New Zealand First believes that there should be a continuing focus on early intervention by expanding the programmes that are already in place such as Family Start Plunket and home-based support and there are many many more in the voluntary and charitable trust area. The $28 million required to establish this commission could be used to ensure that those agencies are more comprehensive in some of the services they currently offer—and very successfully too I might add. Those agencies have already proven their effectiveness. 
When we look at United Future’s election pledge we see that it stated in its pamphlet that a Families Commission would promote the status of families and the role of parents; ensure that all policy development reflected the fundamental needs of children and families; and provide a family mediation service to support promote and develop the provision of marriage and relationship-counselling services. But is marriage mentioned in this bill? There is not a mention. United Future also stated that the commission would facilitate family support and parental education classes and improve the coordination of Government departments. Well this bill fails to meet any of those pledges. It is clear that again United Future has sold out. 
There is no evidence in this bill either that the public of New Zealand have even been listened to. How often do we as parliamentarians get letters from people in New Zealand asking for help for their families from other Government agencies? The answer is regularly. Yet clause 7 of the bill states of the Families Commission: “That function does not include acting as an advocate for the interests of a particular family or particular families in connection with a particular case or issue.” So what is this commission going to do? New Zealand First questions the role of the Families Commission particularly bearing in mind that it appears to have no powers and there is no role definition. How can one advocate for something when one is not clear about what it is that one is advocating for? 
How much will we pay the chief executive officer of this bureaucracy for being the chief executive officer? Another $250000 a year? That appears to be the going rate. That is what will be required. So why not spend that money on helping families to be healthy and to get the services that they require? 
The bottom line is that in this bill we have another Government bureaucracy another Crown entity that will not ensure that our New Zealand families are any better off than they are now. That is a real shame when one considers the amount of money that is being spent on this particular commission. 
Like the Greens we are really concerned about the place on the Order Paper of the Commissioner for Children Bill. It has been there ever since Parliament began this session. We know that there will be a change of commissioner. How much impact has the bill’s languishing on the bottom of the Order Paper had on the person who is currently leaving that office? The next thing we need to ask is how much duplication there will be between the role of the Commissioner for Children and that of the Families Commission. Why do we have to spend the money twice to get the job done once? We really must question it. 
New Zealand First does not believe that this bill will work in its current form. Yet we definitely support families and everything they stand for. There is nothing that we support more than we support families. I will be most interested in the select committee process to see how this bill is modified so that we can all support it because families are something that we all support in New Zealand. But in this instance I have to say that New Zealand First will not be supporting this bill at its first reading.