11. Question No. 11—ChildrenTAMATHA PAUL (Green—Wellington Central) to the Minister for ChildrenQuestion No. 11—Children11. TAMATHA PAUL (Green—Wellington Central) to the Minister for Children: Does she agree with the Chief Children's Commissioner who said on the creation of the Young Serious Offender category and military-style bootcamps that she wants to see an approach that helps to rehabilitate these young people and help them on to a better pathway rather than labelling them"; if not is she taking an approach that will have "unnecessarily punitive impacts" on young people?Hon DAVID SEYMOUR (Associate Minister of Justice) on behalf of the Minister for Children: I wish to say that I actually do agree that it's important that we have an approach that helps to rehabilitate these young people and help them on a better pathway. That is exactly what the Young Serious Offender declaration and military-style academies will do. It will learn from previous initiatives and it will ensure that young people who may have gone a bit off the rails are actually given the support and the encouragement and frankly the discipline to allow them to become positive contributing citizens again in our country for their benefit and the benefit of all. In answer to the second part of the question that there will be unnecessarily punitive impacts well no I don't agree with that but what I do sense from the member's question is that they still believe we should live in a world where no action has any consequence. Well I'm sorry but if you're a young person that creates a serious offence such as a ram raid; such as an assault; such as we saw in Papatoetoe over the weekend well I'm sorry but there are consequences. One of the consequences might be that somebody labels you as a "Young Serious Offender" because that's what you are. If the Opposition can't understand actions and consequences then no wonder we have had such a crime wave in the last six years under their leadership.Tamatha Paul: Does she agree with the Prime Minister's view on her approach to youth justice that "I don't care what you say about whether it does or doesn't work." and if so is that why she is proceeding with an approach which domestic and international evidence shows does not work?Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: Well first of all on behalf of the Minister for Children I find that the Prime Minister has enormous wisdom and sometimes it comes out more fully when he is—Steve Abel: You've already made a speech. Just answer the question.Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: I beg your pardon?Steve Abel: You've already made a speech. Just answer the question.Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: Well I tell you what: that member is a long way from ever answering a question in this House. You know he'd be more likely to be answering his questions from up a tree. The simple fact is that we have an approach here which is learning from previous experience. For example the previous approach: actually the evidence was that when students—when offenders sorry—were in residence actually they had their—Chlöe Swarbrick: They are students.Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: Well they're often students that aren't attending school and that's one of the problems that we've inherited from the previous Government. But the evidence is that actually during the previous programme from 2010 to 2016 actually the offenders did improve while in residence. It was taking them back to the community where often things went wrong and they ended up reoffending. That's why the pilot of the new programme will have three months out of 12 in residence and focus for the subsequent nine months on proper wraparound support and rehabilitation. I believe that that will work. But if you'd like to see evidence of what doesn't work: the previous six years which led to a crime wave so bad even some MPs were getting in on it.Tamatha Paul: Why is she rejecting official advice that military-style activities do not work to reduce offending and going ahead with her political experiment that will only cause more harm to young people?Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: I completely reject the assertion in the member's question. If she wants to talk about a political experiment how's this? Six years of thinking "If only we're kind to criminals they'll start being kind back if we just wait long enough." That was a political experiment undertaken by that Government.Hon Dr Duncan Webb: Point of order. That was simply an attack on the previous Government. It had no substance; it didn't refer to any concrete policies; it was just a swipe. It's usual David Seymour behaviour but at that point—SPEAKER: Hang on. Points of order are heard in silence whether you like them or not. So the member can start his point of order again.Hon Dr Duncan Webb: Those statements by the member were simply a list of allegations about the previous Government that didn't refer to any previous policies or facts and were entirely out of order.SPEAKER: I totally disagree with you—Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: Speaking to the—SPEAKER: No. I'm ruling. I disagree with you because of the nature of the question that was asked. David Seymour—unless he's finished which would be quite good.Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: No no. I could always give you a bit more. Would you like—no?Hon Paul Goldsmith: Has he visited the stores and shops and spoken to the owners victims of youth crime like I have and has he heard the repeated chorus that we've heard from many of them "There are just no consequences for these young kids who have caused me and my family enormous cost" and does he not agree that there is a basic requirement to have real consequences for these young offenders?Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: Well on behalf of the Minister for Children I have observed Karen Chhour as one of the hardest-working Ministers who gets around the country goes and talks to the people that her ministry is responsible for goes to the facilities finds out what is wrong and fixes it in a practical way. And yes she also I am sure visits and has many occasions to talk to the people who are the victims of crime and that among many strands of her rich and authentic life experience—which drives the left mad might I add—is her motivation to make a difference in this Government and this House.Tamatha Paul: Does she accept advice from experts that when traumatised young people are subjected to harsh discipline in bootcamps they are likely to associate their treatment with the abuse caused to them in the past causing further anxiety and stress?Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: Well again there's some difficulty because the member seems to have a sort of paint-by-numbers cartoonish approach to characterising the Government's policy. What she is describing is not what this Government is putting in place. We are putting in place a pilot programme that will take the most serious offenders—those who have done assaults who have done ram raids between the ages of 14 and 17; those who go and hit people with hammers in their retail stores—and actually put them in a place where they get structure and discipline and have an opportunity to build self-esteem by making a real difference in their own lives. In order to do this you need something called values—the idea that each person is equal in their dignity and able to make a positive difference given the structure and the opportunity. That's what they'll be getting.Tamatha Paul: To what extent is a bootcamp programme that is going to involve just 10 young people at a cost that would never be scaled a genuine and serious solution to a problem or is it just politicking with young people's lives for the sake of appearing to be tough on crime?Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: Wow look I think—it's like a cliché machine that's taken the pseudoephedrine! This is a very serious matter. Youth crime has got out of control over the last six years. Lacking the values to give young people structure and discipline having nowhere to take them—having them climb up on the roof and having to be bribed down with KFC actually made a mockery of the values that underpin this country. Now we have a Government that is putting approximately $5 million into a pilot. And yes the pilot will cost a lot more than the programme. That's because we're learning—because we're collecting evidence and data about how to do better for a very serious problem including for those students. So my advice to the member is to stop the paint-by-numbers cliché machine and pay attention to the detail of what's actually being proposed not what sounds good to her Wellington mates.Tamatha Paul: If the point is to do what works why not invest in a pilot programme that was evidence-led not retrofitted to a failed bootcamp model?Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: Once again the member has a caricature of what the Government is doing which is simply untrue. This is a programme that will take young serious offenders and put them in a place where they get structure and discipline and opportunity to build self-esteem. That is three of the 12 months of the programme. The remaining nine months are outside of that facility in the community being rehabilitated learning to live as good honest citizens again—totally different from the caricature that the member has in her mind. And I can only say to her one more time: try focusing on what the Government is actually doing not the caricature she's built in her mind.Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Save it for the ACT Party conference.SPEAKER: Thank you for that Carmel Sepuloni; that's most useful."