Beaumont Carol: Child and Family Protection Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Beaumont Carol: Child and Family Protection Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 July 2011. Volume:674;Page:20151. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
CAROL BEAUMONT (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to speak to the Child and Family Protection Bill. I acknowledge the contribution of all my colleagues. I think we have put this legislation in an important context and have looked at some of the history. But as you say Mr Chair we need to focus on the bill and I intend to do that and to look at some of the main provisions of the bill. 
The bill has three parts which amend respectively the Domestic Violence Act 1995 the Care of Children Act 2004 and the Adoption Act 1955. Before I look at some of those changes I add my voice in saying that not much if anything can be more important than the protection of children. As politicians that must surely be something that we have an absolute responsibility for: to make sure that those who do not have their own voice or access to services in the way that adults do are appropriately cared for. When I made my maiden speech in this House I undertook that I would always stand up and speak out against family and domestic violence and that I would work to seek improvements in this area. 
In my working life I have had quite a bit to do with both women and children who have been subjected to violence from other members of their families. I say the importance of this cannot be overstated. It is not only the terrible statistics we have in terms of children being killed or physically injured; it is the psychological damage it causes in children to see one of their parents—usually their mother—being subjected to violence or indeed being subjected to that sort of violence and fear themselves and the ongoing consequences of that on people’s lives. I am putting it in that context to say this is a very serious matter indeed and if there are things we can do as a Parliament to strengthen this bill we should. Two of my colleagues have put up Supplementary Order Papers to try to improve this bill and I urge members opposite to look at them. 
I also add my voice to those who say that Labour’s Domestic Violence Reform Bill has been languishing at the bottom of the Order Paper. It is a bill that is already there and ready to go which meant we could have had change in this area much more rapidly than we have had. I raised this issue with the Minister Simon Power when he came before our select committee on the estimates. I was told that the rest of the changes in that bill are too expensive to make. Well I think this is a priority for Government expenditure; working in this area must be a priority. 
Returning to the bill I say that it intends to provide more protection for children who are victims of domestic violence to ensure that Family Courts can appropriately manage concurrent proceedings involving children and to reduce administrative barriers to court processes. As the Hon Ruth Dyson said there are good suggestions in this bill and there are specific changes that will make a difference. There is no question about that. That is why Labour is supporting this bill—as we will support any attempt to prevent and mitigate the harm of domestic violence. But it is not ambitious enough. We could have done this much more quickly as Sue Moroney has said. We should have used Labour’s Domestic Violence Reform Bill which is already in place. 
Here are some of the statistics that sit around this issue. In 2008 police responded to 82692 incidents involving some form of domestic violence and most of those cases will have involved children. Our domestic violence rates do not compare well with other OECD countries and we have the worst rate in the developed world for child death by maltreatment. I put on record in debating this bill that it is an absolute scandal that funding for residential care in our refuges has been cut under this Government. It is an absolute scandal that at a time when rates of domestic violence are rising and when generally refuges are the places where women will go with their children when seeking safety we have less funding for residential refuge care. That is an absolute outrage. 
The specific provisions I want to look at are the ones around the Care of Children Act 2004. Clauses 17 to 28 of the Child and Family Protection Bill amend the Care of Children Act 2004. They provide that where a protection order has been made against a party to an application for a parenting order the court may make an order allowing the party only day-to-day care or contact with the child if the court is satisfied that the child will be safe. That is absolutely critically important. If the court is not satisfied that the child will be safe it may make an order for supervised contact between the child and the party. 
One of the things I think is particularly important—I referred to it earlier and it is one of the things I strongly support in this bill—is that the procedures used in care of children hearings are extended to allegations of psychological abuse as well as physical abuse. We all know that in situations of family violence the psychological damage as I said earlier is hugely significant. This is about people who are meant to be a part of those who love and care for their children. Whether it is violence directed towards a child or towards the child’s mother or other member of the family the psychological damage and abuse that can occur in family violence situations is very severe and it can be highly problematic for people in living the rest of their lives. So the fact that procedures used in care of children hearings are extended to allegations of psychological abuse is very important. I certainly applaud that change. 
The bill also strengthens the protection for children from unlawful removal from New Zealand. Many of us will be aware that there are such situations especially now that people are more mobile. Because people live in many different places and migrate between countries this is much more of an issue than perhaps it was in the past. The amendments to the Care of Children Act in providing protection for unlawful removal from New Zealand and the amendments in Part 3 to the Adoption Act 1955 which also make some changes in relation to this issue of international movement of children are worthy of note. 
We think that the Government should be doing more in this area. As I said cuts to the funding of refuges should be something that members opposite raise with their own ministerial colleagues. But also the remainder of the recommendations in Labour’s Domestic Violence Reform Bill could still be prioritised by this Government and should still be prioritised by this Government. Simon Power has said that he intends to progress the remaining provisions but when will that happen? Simon Power is intending to do quite a few things but as Ms Moroney said there are very few sitting days left before the election. It is a shame that this bill has come to us so late in the parliamentary term and here we are in the Committee stage as Ms Moroney said. 
Again I reiterate Labour’s support for the bill and our support for the two Supplementary Order Papers. I urge members opposite to consider them seriously and to at least strengthen the bill as far as they can within the confines of the remaining sitting time by agreeing to those two Supplementary Order Papers in the names of Lynne Pillay and Jacinda Ardern respectively. Thank you.