Roche Denise: Families Commission Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoche Denise: Families Commission Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 19 March 2014. Volume:697;Page:16811. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DENISE ROCHE (Green):Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. E te Whare tēnā koutou katoa. I rise to take the first call for the Greens on the Families Commission Amendment Bill. We will be opposing it and it will not come as any surprise to members of the House that we will be doing that.Essentially we believe that the changes that the Government is making to the Families Commission with this legislation fundamentally undermine the commission’s ability to advocate for families in Aotearoa New Zealand. Like others and the previous speaker Su’a William Sio we have concerns about the independence of the commission and we question the motives of the Government in actually going through this process of essentially decommissioning the commission.We are concerned about the independence of the Families Commission because this legislation changes things so that the Government has the upper hand in picking who will be in the governance roles and what type of research can be conducted. The Government will be hand-picking if you like the board that will replace the commissioners and it will be hand-picking the social science experts panel. We have already heard during the Committee of the whole House stage from members of the Labour Party that that hand-picking already occurs and that there is a close personal relationship between some of the existing commissioners and National Party MPs. We are concerned about this because we believe that it has an impact on the quality of the research that the Government then receives. That is important because Governments should be receiving strong independent research that underpins the policies that they want to enact to make a better society for our families and children.We have already seen examples where the independence of research is being undermined. If we look back to the example of the research that was commissioned in late 2008 on paid parental leave it was very very supportive of the role that parental leave could play in supporting families and supporting children. We saw that completely reneged on by the existing Chief Families Commissioner when she took office who basically said that the commission did not have a view on paid parental leave at this stage. Nothing has changed. The research did not change but the view of the commission did change because the relationship of the commission with the existing Government changed. It is independence that we need to see in place.The Families Commission has a huge part to play in advocating for families and it always has. The commission has given evidence to Productivity Commission inquiries and to select committees and that evidence has enabled politicians to make sound policy. What we see from this undermining of research and this undermining of independence is a decrease in democracy. That is what happens when we do not see free and frank advice being offered from independent organisations that work alongside the Government. What we see is a dumbing-down of the policies that get made. What we see is evidence being presented to the Government ministries and Ministers to make decisions that is based on the policies that they want to have in place. We do see this happening. We see this with the welfare reform panel that was set up. We see these things being set up that actually reinforce the Government’s position and that is not free and frank advice.When we take into account at the same time that if we are wanting independent research we need to be relying on third parties to provide it what we are starting to see is that they too are being stifled in their ability to give free and frank advice. Again that is an undermining of democracy. As an example of this I am thinking of universities where academic researchers are now stating quite clearly that they do not feel that they can give too much of a critical opinion on the Government policies of the day in case they lose their funding.We are seeing this in the community and voluntary sector as well. We saw this with submitters who came to the Social Services Committee. Some people are actually too scared to offer an independent opinion because they fear that the Government’s tentacles will reach out and pull away the funding that they exist on. That is why the Families Commission is even more crucial than ever. It is—or was before these reforms—an independent body that was charged with advocating and putting together the programmes that would lift our families out of poverty and away from the social harms that they are facing today. Like previous speakers we suspect that the Families Commission will eventually become a Government department with all pretence of independence removed.I just want to go back to research again and talk about that a bit. In the research sector there are some alarming things that are happening. The Families Commission had a role in ensuring that the collection of research was put in one place and could be utilised. When we change the Families Commission so that it is now contracting out that role if you like we also undermine the very existence of some of these research organisations.The one that springs to mind most is that of Ngā Pae o te Māramatanga which is a Māori research organisation that currently has its funding in jeopardy because the people who make the decisions about the funding for research for that organisation are the members of the Royal Society of New Zealand. It is sort of like a second-tier contractor if you like and the society determines how the funding pie is cut. This time it has cut Ngā Pae o te Māramatanga out of the picture altogether. What worries me about this is that we do not really know how the Royal Society of New Zealand made that decision. We do not know whether it has Māori on its board who are making those decisions. We certainly do not know whether it is valuing the research that is coming through. I would have thought that we need more research specifically for Māori because in every social indicator of deprivation Māori are overrepresented.One of the things that I have always loved about the Families Commission has been the White Ribbon programme and the work that it has done to support men to take responsibility step up and say that violence in families is not OK. The commission has done huge amounts of work on this and it has every right to be proud of it. My concern is that with the changing nature of the commission that programme will also change.We heard at the Social Services Committee quite recently that the programme is looking at partnerships in the private sector to keep it going. What worries me about that is whether we are suddenly going to have “Skycity White Ribbon Day”. Are we going to be partnering with companies that will incredibly undermine the whole meme of what White Ribbon Day is about? I am absolutely worried that partnership with organisations that promote family—[Interruption] I am concerned that the Families Commission and White Ribbon Day—[Interruption]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Order!DENISE ROCHE: Thank you. I am concerned that the Families Commission could partner with organisations and companies that actually contribute to family harm and violence in Aotearoa New Zealand. When I say that I am referring to the alcohol industry and gambling sector. Just to wind up this Government—[Interruption]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Order! I am sorry to interrupt the member. Can I just remind members that it is a longstanding convention in this House to be aware of the fact that when you are on the cross benches and you are close to someone who is addressing the Chamber any interjections on the speaker have an effect on the microphones. As I said it is a longstanding convention so would members please respect that.DENISE ROCHE: This Government is obsessed with meddling in places where it is undeserved and unwarranted. We will be opposing this bill because we support advocacy for families and this Government is undermining that.