Bennett Paula: Urgent Debates — Ministry of Social Development—Job Cuts 
Bennett Paula: Urgent Debates — Ministry of Social Development—Job Cuts 
[Volume:655;Page:4816] 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 I thank you for allowing this debate today Mr Speaker because it is vitally important that the House debates child abuse and neglect not just when there is a high-profile case the issue is in the media and the public are talking about it because one of our children has been absolutely horrifically hurt. We have heard a lot of rhetoric we have heard a lot of personal insults against me but we need to speak about the actual issues. 
New Zealand has the third-highest rate of child abuse and neglect in the OECD. That is a horrific statistic in any terms. Last year there were 87709 care and protection notifications. That is 22 percent more than in the previous year. Many of those notifications came about because of changes in the notification process. When police visit family violence incidents where children are present a notification must be made. We just heard the statistic that 12116 children and young people were neglected or abused last year. When the notifications that we had were investigated it was found that 12116 children and young people had been neglected or abused. The most horrific statistic of all is that 1356 of those children and young people had been abused again within 6 months. That is where this Government’s focus lies. 
I can guarantee the public of New Zealand that due to the changes that have taken place in the last few months more front-line social workers will be working with those children and with our children in New Zealand. I repeat that guarantee because it is vitally important. I guarantee the public of New Zealand that because of the changes that have been introduced under this Government more front-line social workers will be working in New Zealand. That is what we need. 
We talk about unallocated cases but let us talk about what is really important. The rate of unallocated cases continues to decrease. As I said at the estimates hearing last week we have around 200 unallocated cases compared with 5000 just 5 years ago. All of those notifications of abuse and neglect have met the deadline for action. That is what this Government and I expect the Ministry of Social Development to be truly focused on. 
We have some horrific abuse in New Zealand and it is time we fronted up to it. Let us talk about who abuses children and young people. Unfortunately young infants are most likely to be seriously abused or even killed by their own mother. The next group most likely to be abused will be abused by their father or by their mother’s partner or boyfriend. Unfortunately 47 percent of those children who are hospitalised are Maori. The rate is much lower among Pasifika and European children. We need to start to look at some of those demographics and start to look at the big picture. We need to actually recognise what that means and how to deal with it. [ 
Interruption 
] There are catty calls from the other side of the House but I take this issue really seriously. I think the New Zealand public does as well and is ready to see— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The word that I object to is “catty”. That is an inappropriate description. It is one that is quite pejorative aimed at women MPs and just because the member who uses it is herself a woman it does not mean that it is acceptable to use it or acceptable to describe members on this side as “catty”. Although it might not be on the proscribed list of unparliamentary terms yet it is one I would like you to consider. 
Chris Tremain 
: This is a robust debating chamber. If we start outlawing or ruling out of order words like “catty” we are going down a bad and precious path. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: At this stage I have to say to the honourable member that it is a term in fairly common usage and we do have to be careful not to rule out every critical expression that exists. I just ask the Minister to be reasonable in her use of the language. 
Hon Annette King 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I take exception to the comment the Minister then made that we do not take this issue seriously. We take this issue very seriously. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member cannot debate the matter under a point of order. It is a difficult call for the Speaker to make. Allegations of whether the other side takes an issue seriously are made all the time and I think the next speaker for Labour can readily make the case for how seriously Labour takes it. I do not see how I can rule out that kind of comment. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: There has been quite a lot of precedent where members have taken exception. This is a very serious issue and to accuse members of being uncaring about child abuse is about as objectionable as one can get. It is a horrible horrible thing. As members all around the country we had responses after the Prime Minister’s similar comment last week. I regret that I did not take a point of order when he made it last week. I should have but I was taking some particular care at the time. To suggest that members do not care about this issue is offensive. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member has made his point. 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The previous speaker in the debate made many accusations that I did not take this issue seriously and was not stepping up to the mark. I let those comments go because after all it is a robust debate and at the end of the day I would have my chance to speak. I can understand that members opposite are a bit disgruntled— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister will sit down. The Minister had a perfectly good ground for a point of order until that point but she cannot attack members on the other side of the House under a point of order. I accept exactly what the Minister has said because despite my poor ears today I heard interjections and accusations across the House that the Minister did not take this matter seriously. However in respect of the allegation that has been made by the Minister personal objection by the mover of the motion has been taken. All I would ask the honourable Minister to do maybe is to withdraw the allegation that the Opposition does not take the matter seriously. That is what I ask the Minister to do and I think it is in the interests of good order in the House for both sides not to make that kind of allegation on a serious issue such as this. I ask the Minister to withdraw. 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: I withdraw. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Thank you. 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: Let us just get back to some of the facts. Last year the chief executive of the Ministry of Social Development signalled in the briefing to the incoming Minister that there would be changes and a reduction in staff. Let us make it clear that the value-for-money process within the ministry started in 2005 under the previous Labour Government and as such those changes were happening when I became the Minister. So that was not new. The process was detailed on 12 May as I pointed out at the estimates hearing last week and it is part of the ministry’s ongoing value-for-money programme that was started under Labour. 
Let us make it really clear that more social workers will be on the front line. National campaigned on that promise last year and that is what we are delivering. We are delivering more front-line staff and we are proud to do that. Already we have 60 new front-line staff in Work and Income. Already we have 104 new front-line staff in Work and Income being recruited. What we are seeing at the moment which has come out of the review that has happened since 12 May is that in the care and protection part of social welfare there will be more social workers in front-line roles. That is what National campaigned on and that is what we are delivering. 
This is a serious issue; this is about our children. It is time we got the profile right so that right at the start we can do the programmes that need to be done. When we look at the profile of who is abusing their children we need to ask ourselves who they are and why they are doing it. They are isolated they are urbanised Maori in big numbers unfortunately and they do not have the support networks around them that they need to make a difference. Having more front-line social workers will make a difference. 
A lot has been made of the 18 community liaison social worker positions that are being disestablished. The key role of these people was to raise community awareness of child abuse. Their day-to-day activities included attending community meetings visiting schools working with health professionals and developing policies about responding to and reporting child abuse. Eighteen people nationwide can do only so much. For example they cannot reach all 7000 schools in New Zealand. Let us move the responsibility of public education to everyone in the organisation. The deputy chief executive has been very clear that he expects all 3000 Child Youth and Family workers to be working in this area. Eighteen people nationwide were not making a huge difference but we believe that every social worker being focused on it will. Over 100 Child Youth and Family managers will lead this work. 
Child Youth and Family currently has 300 vacancies 90 of which are for social workers. The chief executive informs me that he is very hopeful that these 18 social workers will apply for those front-line roles. 
The savings from the restructure come mostly from reductions in administrative roles. That will fund extra front-line social workers. We campaigned on this we promised it and we are delivering it. That is what this debate is about it is what the other side was asking and it is what is happening. There will be an immediate increase of 12 caregiver social workers and 12 care services managers and a further increase of around 30 to 40 social workers by the end of the year. That is the crux of the debate; it is what is happening. Let me just repeat that because of the changes that have been implemented in the last couple of months there will be an immediate increase of 12 caregiver social workers an increase of another 12 care services managers and a further increase of around 30 to 40 social workers by the end of the year. That is this Government’s focus and it is where we are putting our priorities. 
We can hear the rhetoric. We had years of change but that change did not happen. Let me give the House an example. I think it is fair not to count notifications because they have changed drastically over the last few years due to some of those changes. Let us talk about substantiated cases of child abuse. In the 2004-05 year there were 11441 substantiated cases of abuse and neglect. In 2007-08 there were 16290 cases— 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: We know this. 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: Well why did the member not do something about it if she knows? If Labour members say that they know these statistics then why did they not do something when they were in Government and could actually make a difference? Why were more social workers not moved to the front line to work with these people? Why was the matter not taken seriously enough so that there is a proper profile of these people? Why has there not been an actual service that talks about how those parents need support? Where is the profile around the isolation and urbanisation of these parents and what leads them to abusing their children? Why for 9 long years did we have report after report but no meaningful action taken and what is New Zealand’s ticking time bomb and most serious issue? There can be rhetoric there can be talk and there can be personal insults but it does not focus on what is most important— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This might seem slightly unusual but I am listening to the Minister and I am having a little bit of trouble hearing especially a comment that I thought the Minister said about urbanisation causing child abuse in Maori. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will resume his seat. It is unacceptable to interrupt the Minister’s speech on a spurious point of order to try to make a political point. That is not acceptable. I invite the Minister to continue. If the member is struggling to hear he can speak to his own colleagues who are interjecting loudly. 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: Those members do not like it when National is focusing on what truly matters. This Government is focusing on what truly matters. The time for awareness is over. We need to make actual changes and that is what this Government is stepping up to do. We need to know what works and we need to know why. We need to have the sorts of programmes that will be getting into people’s homes and fundamentally making a difference. We cannot sit back and hand-wring and ask for report after report without there being actual and real action. 
Recently there has been a little bit of talk about unemployment numbers going up. Quite frankly it is time that Labour woke up to unemployment numbers going up. Unemployment went up for three consecutive quarters under Labour’s watch and when we came in there was no plan and there had been no action. After three consecutive quarters of unemployment going up there was no plan and no action from the Labour Government. Within a few weeks we had introduced the ReStart package which identified those people who had been made redundant and who needed some targeted assistance to help them through that time. We then introduced the Job Support Scheme through my own office. We have certainly seen success with that and it is going better each week as more companies make contact with us and ask what they can do. 
If for one moment we thought that in a global recession unemployment would not be increasing then yes that would be dreaming. When we talk about a blip—just so we can correct some of the debate from time gone by—we see those numbers changing week by week. We see the people who come into the Work and Income office change week by week. I said that we cannot take one week in isolation because it could be a blip and the next week it could be more. One week it could be less the following week it could be more. We do not take one week in isolation which is what was said within that quote and the reason that no one else is picking it up is that it actually is not right. 
More than 30 percent of those people who walk into Work and Income do not go on a benefit; they walk out with a job. That is because the focus has gone more and more on getting jobs into Work and Income. Last week alone we had 824 new jobs come into Work and Income for us to place unemployed people into. It is an increase from 616 in the same week of the year before. In the same week the year before 616 new jobs came in whereas 824 new jobs came in last week. That is because the focus is on jobs jobs and more jobs when it comes to people walking into Work and Income. 
We heard today in question time about job matching and the relationship with McDonald’s. We have put forward 54 people for jobs at McDonald’s 27 of whom got a job. Twelve of those people were on a benefit. The others were not on a benefit because we placed them in work so quickly. That is what we are talking about. I have absolutely no doubt that there would be more people on the unemployment benefit if Work and Income was not focused on jobs and work brokering as much as it is and that is thanks to this Government and its priorities. Let us make no mistake that it is thanks to this Government and its priorities of jobs and focusing our workforce into jobs into the way we get them and into the way we place the right people into them and I will stand by that every time. 
I will end by thanking you again Mr Speaker for the opportunity to debate child abuse and neglect to talk about front-line services and what is needed within the ministry to address those very very serious statistics we see in relation to children that are being hurt. We will stand up for those children every time. A series of policies will be introduced that will make a fundamental difference but right now it is about getting the right people in the right jobs within our ministry. I support my chief executive in that role.