Copeland Gordon: Families Commission Bill — Third Reading 
Copeland Gordon: Families Commission Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10701] 
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
: 
 The first point I would like to make is the simple political one: I would not even be in this Parliament and United Future would not be here with eight MPs if any other party in this Parliament had bothered to pick up with a degree of sincerity and energy the question of the New Zealand family. The National Party when in Government New Zealand First when in Government and the Labour Party when in Government have all had numerous opportunities to do that but they all dumped it. We came along and put it on the political landscape and as a result we are here. I am therefore delighted that today the Families Commission Bill will become law and that we have this wonderful initiative in the life of our country and our families. 
We were surprised and disappointed at many of the comments that came from the other parties at the select committee stage because the comments demonstrated in our view a complete lack of in-depth understanding about current thinking in family practice internationally. They looked for example at the strengthened provisions of clause 7 which cover the main functions of the commission and asked what “families’ resilience” was and what was meant by “families’ strengths”. That terminology is not some trendy fad that one drops into conversations at a cocktail party to sound PC. Indeed those concepts reflect an enormous weight of research and family practice that is well documented and is considered by those working at the grass roots level with families to improve outcomes as being the way forward. Instead of limiting the debate on how best to help families in purely income-related terms which has tended to be the emphasis of Parliaments in New Zealand over a considerable amount of time we need to better understand why it is that some individuals and families faced with serious threats and challenges to their well-being manage to cope well while others faced with similar circumstances do not manage to do so. Scholars and others interested in that question have developed the concept of resilience to explain that quality that holds family life together through the scheduled and unscheduled transitions in life. 
Families with low resilience factors do not experience improved outcomes just by increasing their income although that may be part of the solution and we would certainly do all that we can to ensure that families are well resourced and we have a range of taxation policies that will do that. The only other point I would like to make in order to keep this fairly brief is one that we have spoken on before. For many years in Parliament when it comes to the New Zealand family we have put huge resources into putting additional ambulances at the bottom of the cliff. That is right and proper because we do need to face the realities of family breakdown in this country. But this bill and at this point in history I believe is the time when it is incumbent upon us as a Parliament to start to put a fence at the top of the cliff so that we begin to understand why it is that so many people are in such dire straits in the first place and to come up with strategies and policies that will ensure that family life over the next generation in New Zealand begins to improve and hopefully improve dramatically. We all need to be part of that and the Government the State itself needs to give a lead.