Mark Ron: Children Young Persons and Their Families  Amendment Bill (No 6) — First Reading 
Mark Ron: Children Young Persons and Their Families  Amendment Bill (No 6) — First Reading 
[Volume:645;Page:14592] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 I congratulate you Madam Assistant Speaker on your appointment. Frankly I would not have minded if you had called me darling—I know you do so every time I see you in the elevator! That is the way things are down in Canterbury; we get on together despite the fact we might have differing philosophical views. As a member of Parliament I have been well looked after by one of your former pupils from Avonside Girls’ High School—my electorate agent Heidi Ireland. I am fortunate to have one of your former students in that role. I am fortunate also to have one of your former students as my daughter-in-law. In fact your reputation throughout Canterbury stands very very high. Everyone down home will be saying well done—that is for sure. 
Unfortunately I wish I could say similar things about the Children Young Persons and Their Families Amendment Bill (No 6). I will start by saying that the bill contains a number of necessary amendments to the Children Young Persons and Their Families Act. 
These amendments need to be progressed; New Zealand First will not deny that. Barbara Stewart who is our spokesperson on social welfare would be annoyed with me if I did not say that and I acknowledge that. 
I also say that some credit should have come from the Minister for Social Development and Employment from the ministry and from the Labour Government for the work behind the scenes of Judy Turner from the United Future party because some of us know where a lot of this work had its genesis. It did not lie in the offices at certain places around this Parliament. I tell Judy Turner that I think this House does her a disservice when it does not recognise the work and the vast amount of time in research that she and her staff in United Future have put in in this field. That is the difference between someone who comes here to make a strong and positive difference to the lives of New Zealanders and others who come here to seek and to politick. 
On that note having just listened to Judith Collins’ commentary I will compare her rhetoric this evening with this quotation out of her mouth on  
Eye to Eye with Willie Jackson 
 on 11 August 2007 when talking about kids in gangs: “Kids get involved in gangs because they are looking for fathers. They are looking for someone who cares about them. They are looking for someone who actually gives them some structure in their lives—and that is not romanticising it. The fact is we’ve got kids out there who think nobody has ever said anything good about them who have never belonged to anything except that everything they have ever done has been wrong. And basically the gang is their new home.” Well what is wrong with that? Members can compare it with this from John Key to the Police Association: “National will make criminal gangs a key target in our fight against crime. It’s a battle where we think the police deserve better legislative backing than they’re getting.” The point is that Judith Collins said on  
Eye to Eye with Willie Jackson 
 that she would not support lowering the age of criminal responsibility—that the National Party would not support it—but the top quote given by John Key 2 months later was given when the National Party remembered that in its 2005 manifesto it told the nation that it would lower the age of criminal responsibility. 
So I tell Judith Collins that if we want to talk about victims we should not forget the elderly people who were the victims of “no ifs no buts no maybes” the classic promise from a National Government that it would repeal the surcharge and give people back their money—[ 
Interruption 
]. National members do not like me saying that eh. And what about the victims of the nuclear tests who were given $250000 for a class action by the New Zealand First - National coalition Government? There was a lot of discussion on  
Morning Report 
 about that today. The moment that New Zealand First was out of the Government National took the money off the victims. Those members should never forget that because when we travel the country we talk about victims. 
Let us be honest: Judith Collins supports the victims one day if it suits her political agenda but will kneecap them the next day if it suits her political agenda. She is a hollow woman from a team of hollow people and we cannot believe a word they say. 
Coming to the bill— 
Judith Collins 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. That member is saying that people cannot believe a word I say. But this is a man from New Zealand First and I actually take extreme exception to that. His whole speech has been an attack on me—which is quite flattering frankly—and none of it has been about this bill. 
RON MARK 
: Speaking to the point of order I thought  
The Hollow Men  
was well known and well documented and seen all over the nation—in fact it has been tabled in this House—and Judith Collins is quite often mentioned in the book—[ 
Interruption 
] Oh it should be “The Hollow Woman”—sorry. I will withdraw. She is a hollow woman. 
Coming to the bill which is where I really want to be I say that it has some strengths as we have said. I think that Anne Tolley tried to point that out. But we can see a classic weakness in raising the age of criminal responsibility to 18. In fact to say “18” is not exactly correct. The bill raises the age to 17 years 364 days 23 hours 59 minutes and 59 seconds and miraculously when that one second ticks over suddenly that 17-year-old will be able to be held accountable for his or her crimes. 
We in New Zealand First are saying that that piece of the legislation totally undermines one of the key principles that we should all be upholding—that is the democratic right of New Zealanders to have a say in legislation of this type. We believe that it flies completely in the face of the support we have had for my bill the Young Offenders (Serious Crimes) Bill. We believe that it flies totally in the face of everything we have heard from John Key in his state of the nation speech given after the Christmas holidays. We believe that it totally smacks the mouths of every parent whose child was assaulted over the Christmas break by young teenagers and of people who were attacked with baseball bats by young offenders. 
We believe that that one amendment under the guise of supposedly making New Zealand fit with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child is a falsity and it is wrong. Let us remember—let us cast our minds back—what happened when New Zealand signed the UN convention. Did New Zealand and the people representing it do it wholly without reservation? No. I find it very annoying—and Anne Tolley is nodding because she knows—deceptive and wrong to refer to the convention. Those who do so completely forget to tell us that the people who signed that convention reserved the right of New Zealand to pass laws fitting New Zealand’s situation. Chester Borrows is looking at me. Never once did the advisers to the Law and Order Committee on my bill even tell us that—never once did they table a speech from the UN convention showing that New Zealand reserved its right to pass laws that fitted the New Zealand ethos and situation. No and now we get the convention thrown at us as if it is a holy grail that we must all bend down and bow to. Well that is wrong. We do not. 
Members should hear this: polls across the country are showing that between 82 and 92 percent of people consistently do not want the age of criminal responsibility raised. I do not know about some people who might have been brought up in other countries that Idi Amin might have led but this is New Zealand. This is a free and democratic state this is a place where the majority have the say and if there is one thing that I thought the Labour Government might be reflecting on given its polling right now it is that what is writing its doom is its persistence in socially re-engineering New Zealand along the views it holds. Well Government members should get this: not everyone holds their views. 
This bill has many good things about it. It extends care and protection to the Youth Court and the options available on sentencing are a good thing. New Zealand First does not disagree and I do not think there is a member in this House who disagrees. But why throw this piece in that raises the age of criminal responsibility? Why slap people back down and say: “Oh we know what’s better.”? It is like the smacking bill all over again—the Government knows what is better. 
I am sorry but New Zealand First does not think the Government knows what is better. Firstly New Zealand First would have appreciated some recognition for the work that Judy Turner did. Secondly we would have appreciated people listening to us. For the Labour Government to slip this piece in knowing how strongly New Zealand First feels about such things—we negotiated a provision into the confidence and supply agreement with the Government to get my member’s bill at least to the select committee where we knew the Government would reserve the right to vote against it—smacks of an arrogance that is unbelievable. 
I say good luck to the Government. I know that the Government—[ 
Interruption 
] Ms Collins cannot help saying “poodle”. I think Ms Collins will be told by a lot of vets around the country exactly where she sits but that is coming in the polls so we should not worry about it. I would say— 
Judith Collins 
: Ha ha! 
RON MARK 
: That manic sort of laughter only confirms one other thing. She should take a holiday. New Zealand First is sorry. It would like to be supporting many aspects of this bill and no doubt they will pass and we will say well done on those aspects. But this piece inside the legislation flies in the face of things we have stood for and we will not be supporting this bill.