Ball DarrochDARROCH BALL (NZ First): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. It's an absolute privilege to stand for the first time this year on behalf of New Zealand First in support of this bill the Social Workers Registration Legislation Bill. I'll get into the four main aims in a second but first I just want to address a few things that Maureen Pugh said in her speech and Louise Upston. I don't blame Maureen Pugh so much because she wasn't here last term when this bill was introduced and quite clearly she's been given some wrong notes about the accuracy with which this bill has made its way to the House and why it has come to this House. Louise Upston made the point that—and wanted to make a point and she literally said that she wanted it noted—the bill that was introduced by the Hon Anne Tolley when she was the Minister for Social Development was unanimously supported and that was after an inquiry that Maureen Pugh said was instigated by the National Party and by the Minister as well. What I would like noted also is that in 2016 the Hon Carmel Sepuloni's member's bill that did exactly the same thing and that was pulled from the ballot was not unanimously supported and I believe the only party that did not support it was the National Party. So if we want to talk about political expediency or political motivations and getting the facts right then maybe the National Party—and in particular Maureen Pugh—needs to do a little bit of a history lesson and have a look at who voted against the original legislation that was brought in by the now this side of the House and who didn't support it when it was coming through and who are now claiming that they are holier than thou—that they are the saviours of the social services sector in ensuring that there is mandatory registration. It is utterly not true and they know it—I mean the sector knows it. Both Labour and New Zealand First—because New Zealand First did have a member's bill in there as well and I believe it was prior to the Labour Party's but we won't go there—were putting pressure on the National Government and this is why it has come this far. Not only that but the first reading did occur on the very last sitting day of the last parliamentary term. So where was the importance—I mean we've been hearing about back in 2000 when the requests were made about being registered and how it's a long time overdue but it was not until the very last sitting day of the last term that National brought this to the House. Where is the importance that the National Party has been saying is on this topic? What's a little bit more ironic is that the whole scope of practice and definition of the role of a social worker has dominated both speeches from the National Party members and in fact the original bill that came in in 2017 did not include the definition of what a social worker" is. One of the most important submissions and comments that was made from the major stakeholders that came through the select committee process was that there was an absolute need for the definition of what a "social worker" is what their role is and the scope of practice and that is what the Minister has been bringing in and will bring in with Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 187. Back to the bill and the aim. There are four main aims—there are actually two main aims and there are four ways of getting there. So the two main aims are to "increase the professionalism of the social work and protect the public from harm". Four ways of doing that are "making the registration system compulsory for all social workers; protecting the use of the title 'social worker'; ensuring that social workers are competent and fit to practise; providing an appropriate complaints and disciplinary process."—all of which will be achieved not only with this bill as introduced but with the SOP coming in the future. I mentioned earlier that the Minister and I had put in members' bills on this topic earlier in 2016 and the main motivation for that was because I was one of I think it was about 85 percent of the public of New Zealand who automatically assume that social workers are registered and have to be registered in the first place. It just makes common sense and with the fact that we know that the important professions deal with not vulnerable people but people in general and society in general and in particular certain professions like teachers doctors nurses and social workers deal with very vulnerable people and children. Everyone assumed—quite rightly—that they had to be registered in the first instance and they weren't and this is the process of getting there. When we're talking about a registration above all else it's about not only the trust that the individual has with that relationship with that social worker but also the trust that society and the country and the community has with the important role and profession of social workers and what they bring and the service that they deliver to society as a whole. It's not only about the trust but also it's about ensuring the higher levels of training and the ability for oversight of higher levels of training quality control and discipline all of which are basically a struggle and/or impossible if there is no mandatory registration. It's also important to note that there were a few issues raised during the select committee process and the main issue from the main stakeholders in the practising of social work is like I've mentioned the definition that includes the roles that use the title or description of "social worker". So in the original bill when it was introduced there was an ability for people to get around the—in the bill that we introduced if we had just protected the title "social worker" that would have led itself to be open to manipulation unfortunately not only by individuals and all they would have had to do was not call themselves social workers and carry on doing the same role but also by employers in not creating a job entitled "social worker" and the job and the role would have remained the same. So the problem that we're trying to solve is not necessarily just—because it is part of it—protecting the term "social worker" but also protecting the role and the relationship that they have with those that they provide the service with and the only way that that can happen is if there is a definition of what social work is and a scope of practice as well. So we fully support where the Minister is going with in terms of this bill and the SOP that will be introduced in the committee of the whole House. I'd just like to finish my speech with the reality of what the SOP is and why the SOP is needed. DEPUTY SPEAKER: No you can't—no you can't. You can talk about issues that were raised in the select committee but you can't talk about the SOP because it isn't on the Table. DARROCH BALL: Well I'm not talking about the SOP; I'm talking about the reason why it's needed which is what I said. DEPUTY SPEAKER: No no—only as it relates to the issues that were raised in the select committee. DARROCH BALL: Well that's what I said. DEPUTY SPEAKER: No well you need to reframe it is what I'm saying. Don't talk about it as a reason for an SOP; talk about it as issues that were raised at the select committee. DARROCH BALL: OK. So one of the main issues that was brought forward which I've already mentioned for the need of something that will be tabled later on was from the Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Social Workers. Their primary concern with the whole bill was that the bill as it was introduced failed to meet the stated objective of protecting the public from harm as only practitioners employed—paid or voluntary—in roles described using the words "social worker" or "social work" will be required to register. It is anticipated that anything up to half of the current social work workforce would not require an annual practising certificate or be required to register. So that's the problem in a nutshell with the bill as it stands and that is why—DEPUTY SPEAKER: That is what was raised in the select committee. DARROCH BALL: —that was what was raised which we will be addressing throughout the process of the bill going through the House. New Zealand First supports this bill."