Sio William: Families Commission Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Sio William: Families Commission Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8878. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Su’a WILLIAM SIO (Labour—Mangere) 
: 
 I am happy to rise to give this contribution on the second reading of the Families Commission Amendment Bill. I want to acknowledge the contribution of my colleagues on the Social Services Committee. In particular I acknowledge Jacinda Ardern and Dr Rajen Prasad because it was those two who took the lead in Labour’s contribution as this bill was analysed through the committee. 
As the Associate Minister for Social Development the Hon Chester Borrows said this bill seeks to amend the Families Commission Act 2003 to make a number of changes to the role and operation of the commission with the aim of improving decision making in the social sector. Labour supported the first reading of this bill. We wanted it to go to the select committee as we wanted to look closely at the implications of the bill and give the wider community the opportunity to make its submissions and to raise its concerns on this matter. 
We understand that one member of the commission would be appointed by the Minister for Social Development as Families Commissioner while the remaining members would remain members without being appointed commissioners as they are at present. The Families Commission members would continue to comprise the board. The restructure would include the establishment of a social science experts panel to provide guidance and academic peer review of any research undertaken by and on behalf of the commission. The commission would also be given a new monitoring evaluation and research function which would require it to determine where evidence and research would help decide or achieve Government priorities and to commission research and manage research contracts in the social sector. The commission would also be required to prepare and publish an annual Families Status Report which would measure and monitor the well-being of New Zealand families. It would also be given access by the Government Statistician to individual schedules for research or statistical purposes. 
After the select committee process and in consideration of what we heard from submitters Labour now opposes this bill. Labour believes that the changes proposed to the commission in this bill continue an agenda to fundamentally alter its nature so that it becomes something close to a Government department or ministry rather than being an autonomous Crown entity. These changes in our view compromise the commission and will limit its independence and ability to advocate effectively for families. Given these changes Labour stands by its policy of disestablishing the commission and instead establishing a ministry for children to focus on policies and programmes that place children and families at the centre of all policy and ensure their interests are paramount. 
I think that when we considered the significant submissions that came from the public the one that stood out in my mind was the submission by the Salvation Army and more particularly it was reaffirmed in its report  
She’ll be Right 
. One cannot help but recognise that we have a huge problem amongst the children of New Zealand. In fact the figures show that unless we actively have the political will to address the poverty that is experienced by many families we are just not going to get on top of it. So in Labour’s view establishing a ministry for children would enable a greater focus of energy resourcing and political will in attempting to address this issue recognising that the issue of the safety and the well-being of our children has to be a priority for the long term. 
This bill before us limits the advocacy function of the commission and establishes a centre for family and whanau knowledge within the commission to focus on consultations and advocacy. It is unclear to us why Peter Dunne is supporting this bill given that the Government is curbing the role and independent nature of the commission. The funding for this function is predetermined at $3.8 million per annum but this centre is given the additional function of producing an annual Families Status Report which measures and monitors the well-being of New Zealand families. Arguably this could be done by the Ministry of Social Development. This function is likely to be the dominant focus of the commission’s advocacy function and will take up a big chunk of the funding if it is done well. It is likely that there will be little focus on the more general advocacy role of the commission. The amendment bill stipulates that the commission’s consultations with families will be limited to its advocacy functions. Hence its research and evaluation function will not benefit from the views of family generally. 
The bill also establishes a social policy evaluation and research unit within the commission with a predetermined annual budget of $3.55 million. This unit will provide independent monitoring and evaluation of programmes and intervention in the social sector and provide research into key issues programmes and interventions across the sector. This section has the additional functions of identifying opportunities where evidence of research will assist in achieving the Government’s priorities in the social sector commissioning research on behalf of the Government and managing contracts—again on behalf of Government. This will be closely linked to what the Government is doing and thus eliminate the independence of the commission to undertake research it considers necessary—for example research into poverty and financial literacy research into paid parental leave and research into family violence: research into all the areas that our community has identified are important in order for us to address this issue adequately. 
The bill significantly alters the governance arrangements of the commission. There will be only one Families Commissioner who will not necessarily be the chair of the board of the Families Commission. Others on the board will be members. The functions of the Families Commission will be determined by the board. The chief executive officer position is retained. In addition a social science experts panel will be appointed by the Minister and the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor to peer review the commission’s evaluation and provide advice. Currently the commission uses peer reviewers from universities other research centres and independent experts. It is difficult to see how a panel of four people can peer review the range of research that might be undertaken. Once again arguably the commission will be acting like a Government department or ministry focusing on the issues that the Government considers important. We question the need for this. 
This is in our view a confused governance structure. The power effectively lies with its chief executive as the Families Commissioner’s sole role is redundant. It is unclear who will set the work programme for the commission: the Minister the Government the advisory panel the Families Commissioner the chief executive or the senior staff of the commission. The advocacy functions of the commission will be seriously limited as it will be preoccupied with reporting annually on the state of families. This is something the social report used to do yearly and which will be produced only every 3 years. 
Recently there was an example where my colleague Sue Moroney promoted a very successful campaign around paid parental leave—a campaign that was picked up and supported by the majority of New Zealanders which this Government does not like. But the commission abandoned its role as an independent commission and agreed with the Government on paid parental leave solely based on the economic cost rather than evidence-based policy assessment. 
That gives you an example that this Government rather than allowing the commission to independently provide evidence-based advice—as the commission was set up to do—wants to be able to control the commission. I think the Government is on the wrong path. The right path is the Labour Party policy of disestablishing the commission and establishing instead a ministry for children. That then gives the Government and us—this House—a greater focus of energy and resources on addressing the issues of children.