Katene Rahui: Domestic Violence (Enhancing Safety) Bill — Second Reading 
Katene Rahui: Domestic Violence (Enhancing Safety) Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:657;Page:6736] 
RAHUI KATENE (Maori Party—Te Tai Tonga) 
: 
 Domestic violence is one of those bizarre features of the system of gross domestic product in which the more GDP rises the better the overall health and well-being of the nation is assumed. If we were to examine the trends in domestic violence one would think our well-being assured in terms of the consistent rising impact of the violence statistics yet it is killing us. On average every year 14 women 10 children and six men die as a result of family violence. 
The 2006 figure for family violence - related offences represents a 54 percent increase on 2001. In real terms the figure rose from 21205 offences in 2001 to 32675 offences in 2006. In the notifications to Child Youth and Family for those same years there was a massive increase of 161 percent rising from 2636 notifications to 68819 notifications in 2006. In the courts prosecutions for males assaulting females increased 30 percent from 3307 in 2000 to 4285 in 2006 while in women’s refuges the number of services and programmes delivered to women and children experienced a 55 percent increase between 2002 and 2006 from 18628 services and programmes to 28845 services and programmes in 2006. 
Those statistics make up the cold hard face of violence that diminishes the potential of our families and damages the optimism for generations to come. It is the ugly reality of life for far too many New Zealanders and it is the call for help that we cannot ignore. There is no question that the Maori Party will stand in the way of any interventions that might help to protect the safety of women and children and the decency of life that every family deserves. Let us face it—there is a lot that can be done. 
One of the most disturbing of the 66 submissions received by the Justice and Electoral Committee was from Heather Henare of the National Collective of Independent Woman’s Refuges. Its information in direct contrast to the rising volumes of domestic violence incidents revealed the declining number of applications for protection orders. The collective advised the committee that women who have experienced violence are losing faith in the system due to the cost; due to the difficulty in obtaining protection orders; due to the notice order and because of the failure to follow up arrest and prosecute breaches of protection including non-attendance at respondent programmes which means the orders do not work to protect women. The collective also noted that psychological abuse is not taken seriously when granting a protection order following up breaches determining the care of children and discharging orders. These are all serious issues and ones that require further consideration than this bill is capable of. 
The Human Rights Commission also endorsed this view noting the research and the recent review of the Domestic Violence Act report that improvements are needed to ensure that the Act is implemented to its full effect. This view is endorsed by a recent report entitled  
Living at the Cutting Edge: Women’s Experiences of Protection Orders 
. The issues identified in the report suggest that the Domestic Violence Act 1995 has failed to realise its promise. Interestingly very few of the key informants in that report have problems with the Act as it is written. Overwhelmingly the analysis of the case studies and decisions reflects not inadequate legislation but inadequate implementation. The key problem has been getting protection orders upheld by the police and the courts. Quite simply putting more laws in place will not address the problems with implementing the law. If we were to think that this bill is the one-stop shop to solve all issues relating to domestic violence we would be wrong. But it is a step along the way. 
The key initiatives that will be advanced with this legislation are in relation to protection orders and in particular the introduction of on-the-spot police orders which can be made where there is insufficient evidence of an offence to make an arrest but where police believe domestic violence is occurring. This is an intervention that has been widely supported across the land. We all know that with incidents of violence delay can be deadly. The problem with protection orders to date is that victims must apply to the court for orders and often do not because of fear of repercussions because of cost because of a lack of trust in the system and because in the cold light of day the process seems to be another hurdle acting against the desire for peace no matter what the price. So we applaud the move to issue immediate temporary protection orders which will have the effect of removing the alleged offender from the home for a period of up to 5 days. Our caucus was absolutely unanimous in our support for this initiative which in effect removes the problem from the home. 
I remember the advice of Moana Jackson at the whanau support workshop held at Hopuhopu last year. His view was “Stop the hurt explore the reason deny the presumption and address the causes”. Outsiders often look at situations of family violence and express frustration even contempt at the way in which family members will continue to return to the family home and be accepted within the folds of family—the family in which gross violence has occurred. In my work with Te Ratonga Ture and with Women’s Refuge I know it was common for women to return seven or eight times to a violent situation before enough was enough. The point is that these women love their partners. It is the violence they hate. The same thing can be said for families who welcome home an offender. Men who have come home straight from prison after serving a sentence for violent assault are embraced as fathers and husbands despite the fear and devastation created from their lack of control. We support the move to implement police-issued protection orders which have the effect of removing the problem from the home in order to allow the hurt to stop and to allow time and space to explore the reason. We also support the intention to make it an offence to contravene a protection order and believe that a breach can lead to an immediate arrest. This must be explicit in the legislation. 
This bill achieves progress in amending the Domestic Violence Act 1995 the Sentencing Act 2002 and the Bail Act 2000. It strengthens the response of the police and the courts to acts of domestic violence in order to enhance safety of whanau and victims and this is a good thing. But we must not stop just at this legislation in isolation of the wide-ranging approach we can take and all should take to stop family violence in our midst. I was greatly moved by the wise advice of one of my aunties from Christchurch Aunty Kiwa Hutchens who told the select committee: “Kaua e utua ki te kino me haere ano i te rangimaria.” Do not punish wrongdoing with unkindness; seek peaceful solutions. 
We are obviously concerned about the potential damage to our tamariki and our whanau if our children are to be separated for any great time from their caregivers their mothers and their fathers. I am mindful too of the guidance from the Nelson Rape and Sexual Abuse Network which reminded us that violence is not likely to be an isolated incident but rather a part of a long and insidious build-up generally over months if not years where the alleged offenders slowly but surely through threat fear and other tactics including actual physical or sexual violence isolate the women and the hidden victims the children. We must take a proactive and comprehensive approach that supports and nurtures family and whanau to take collective responsibility for each other. We call that approach whanau ora. It is singularly the most significant step this Government can take to create futures free of harm. Finally then the Maori Party will support this bill as a move towards whanau ora.