Warren-Clark AngieANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. It is a pleasure to stand and take a call on this bill and I want to firstly acknowledge the member Karen Chhour for bringing this to the House. I refreshed my memory on your maiden speech Karen and you spoke about wanting to do this in your maiden speech so I want to acknowledge you for bringing this bill here and I acknowledge your lived experience. However Labour will not be supporting this bill. We will not be supporting this bill for many many reasons. The reality is quite simply that section 7AA of the Act creates a policy that supports and enables Māori children and all children to be cared for. Your general policy statement states that the duties of the Chief Executive of Oranga Tamariki … are at odds with the agency's primary purpose to support the wellbeing and act in the best interests" of the child. I cannot reconcile that purpose with the reality of what section 7AA actually does and I understand your sense of frustration around some of the awful stories that we do hear—I understand that. But section 7AA is in place for a reason and it binds the Crown to a practical commitment under the Treaty to ensure that policies and practices have the objective of improving the outcomes for tamariki rangatahi and whānau Māori. This amendment was inserted specifically to create a fundamental obligation to ensure that Māori are supported to have improved outcomes. Now I'm going to quote a reason for this—and my apologies because it is a quote and so I will be reading. The Waitangi Tribunal report Wai 2915 which is He Pāharakeke he Rito Whakakīkinga Whāruarua—apologies for my pronunciation—says that "The disparities that we examine are both enduring and stark … It is sufficient to note the following from the evidence we have heard. Between 2000 and 2018 the incidence of tamariki Māori aged 16 and under in State care rose from one in every 125 Māori children to one in every 64. By 2012 tamariki Māori were five times more likely than their non-Māori counterparts to enter State care. Māori were 54.7 per cent of children in care in June 2013 climbing to 61.2 per cent of children … in 2017. The proportion of Pākehā children in care over the same period reduced from 33.2 per cent to 26 per cent." The duty of the chief executive is put in place because the primary users of this service are Māori and to take a child from a Māori family and not take into account their cultural needs is actually harmful—it's harmful to those children. However I heard the member talk quite clearly about children being taken from families that they're happy with. Reverse uplifts no longer occur and we cannot and do not support that kind of behaviour. The Minister has put a stop to that and it is really important to note that. The evidence across the plethora of information I looked at is starkly clear that Māori children thrive when their needs are attended to including their cultural needs. It is better for Māori children. Now I don't say that in the sense that—I struggled with how I would talk about that but as the mother of Māori children who has carried whakapapa in my own whenua I feel like I can say that. So as a consequence I do want to say that I do know that our children will absolutely be better off this way. I just want to quote another item in regards to—the research is just so overwhelming. It is difficult with the member's heartfelt desire to make a change to literally just stand here and speak with the overwhelming evidence that says section 7AA needs to be in place and that we are now building a system that is much more robust and which is much more approachable and appropriate for all children but also to try and stem the uplifts that happen within this country. "Nicola Atwool an assistant professor of social work at the University of Otago and expert on child attachment explained that even in cases where the child is experiencing neglect or harm at home … uprooting children from their family and culture can have traumatic consequences. 'There seems to be I think still some really naive assumptions that if parenting has not been adequate or in some cases quite severely damaging their children will automatically connect to someone else. They don't and the research tells us that. We know that the birth family remained significant' Atwool said." This bill is a divisive part of ACT policy that talks quite significantly to a separatism which we do not believe in. Being able to have culturally appropriate services and culturally appropriate delivery of those services and being understanding of other cultures or differing cultures actually isn't a bad thing. It isn't a frightening thing and it isn't an evil thing. It is something that we as a country need to be mature enough to understand that there are differences in this country and some people need to be supported to understand that. Penny Simmonds: In 10 weeks' time you'll look back on this and you will regret it. ANGIE WARREN-CLARK: I'll look back on this and regret saying that we need to work in harmony together and support and value each other—is that what I will look back on? As the mother of Māori children I can tell you that I will never once in this House apologise for saying that we should work together in harmony and separatism is not for us. [Interruption]Mr Speaker I think that I should probably—now that I can't hear myself speak I shall take my seat and say that the Labour Party absolutely categorically does not support this bill."