Newman Muriel: Social Workers Registration Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Newman Muriel: Social Workers Registration Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:607;Page:4860] 
Dr MURIEL NEWMAN (ACT NZ) 
: 
 Here we are again under urgency dealing with the Social Workers Registration Bill. Last time the bill was brought into the House it was under urgency and here we are again. What a contrast this bill is to the previous bill before the House the Hop Industry Restructuring Bill. The previous bill was all about deregulation; this bill is all about regulation. We already have self-regulation in the social worker industry but obviously this Government believes that it cannot trust the industry—the 10000 social workers in New Zealand—and that it has to come down with the heavy hand of the State. 
The Government believes that the State has to step in and take over control of the industry but it is not doing it. All it is saying is that it is going to register social workers. But it is a Clayton’s bill. It is a Clayton’s regulation because at the end of the day it is voluntary. Can anyone imagine passing in Parliament a bill that says: “We’re going to regulate an industry but it’s going to be voluntary.”? I believe that this is the strangest piece of legislation that has been through this Parliament for a very long time. 
I tried to think why if it is to be voluntary Labour is trying to do it. We have to remember that Labour is a socialist Government and that socialist Governments love to regulate anything that moves. If it does not move they simply nationalise it. The basic rule in policy development and passing legislation is that if it is not broken it does not need to be fixed. 
At our hearings in the Social Services Committee I asked for evidence of a tidal wave of complaints against poor social work practice in New Zealand. There was none. The only major agency that has complaints against it is the State agency. That means that this bill has been brought in to address problems with Child Youth and Family Services—problems that Mick Brown highlighted in his very good report. Instead of the Government addressing the problems in the Department of Child Youth and Family Services it decided to regulate the whole industry in New Zealand. That is an extreme example of absolutely poor governance and this bill is a very good example of poor legislation. It makes the Government look tough on poor social work practice but it is really a Clayton’s bill. It is voluntary not mandatory. 
Mick Brown highlighted huge concerns about competency within the Department of Child Youth and Family Services. Just to refresh people’s memory this came after the tragic case of James Whakaruru. A number of reports were written about his death and they found many cracks and holes in the way the department handled that little boy’s case. He ended up dying. Since that time we have seen another high profile case—that of little Lillybing. A whole lot of other cases have also come to the attention of the public of New Zealand—tough cases that the department has been involved in—and cracks have been found in the handling of them. The point is that Judge Mick Brown put forward a plan of action for dealing with systemic failure within the department. I asked the Minister how many recommendations from Judge Mick Brown he had actually put into practice and he will not tell me. Clearly the Minister is not on top of his job. 
Since Judge Mick Brown highlighted those problems within the department 4000 unallocated cases of potential child abuse have occurred. Hundreds of those cases were registered as critical and were not seen within the statutory 24 hours. The very urgent cases were not seen within 2 days and so on. We have had an escalation of the number of children being taken from their homes put into care and not being returned to their homes. We have had low morale within the department as it has been restructured time and time again. We found out that the number of social workers with less than 5 years’ experience increased from 67 percent in 2001 to 74 percent in 2002. 
So we have a picture of an extremely troubled department. Not only that we also know that it does not follow best practice. In the corporate world in most other places best practice is followed. If one agency is doing well and another one under the control of the same department is not then it is best practice to find out what is going right and spread it around. The Department of Child Youth and Family Services does not do even that. It is an agency that has systemic failure that needs to be addressed. 
This bill will not address the problem at all. The reason is that the Minister decided he wanted all statutory social workers to be registered within 6 years. He took the idea to Cabinet and Cabinet agreed that it would be a very good idea to register them. But some months later after the Minister had consulted a bit more he found that it was not a good idea for all statutory social workers to be registered when social workers in non-Government agencies and private practitioners do not need to be. He said that that was not fair and did a U-turn. He asked Cabinet to change its mind on registering all social workers in Child Youth and Family Services involved with statutory responsibilities. The real reason is that he suddenly figured out that registering all the social workers in the Department of Child Youth and Family Services would cost around $30 million. That is the real reason the Minister did a U-turn and changed his mind. So we now have a bill that he talks tough on—a bill that he will not even ensure his own department abides by. 
This is disgraceful legislation because it raises many hopes in New Zealand that social work standards will improve. There is nothing wrong with trying to improve social work standards. In fact it is an honourable goal. But this bill being a voluntary bill will not do that. It will create two classes of social workers—those who can afford the $14000 and those who cannot. The ones most likely to afford it will be those who are employed by the Government. We will end up with Government agencies with registered social workers and private practitioners not being able to register. 
The training of social workers is another problem I would like to raise. When the private sector was invited to provide tertiary education a number of providers decided that distance social work courses were a really good idea because then social workers could continue in their jobs while quietly working towards registration and building their qualifications. But this Government has come in and like a great big Godzilla has slapped down private training providers. Basically the Government wants to get rid of private providers from the tertiary education sector. The people who will be hurt will be those very social workers who would like to improve and increase their qualifications. Distance course providers will find that all of a sudden they cannot do it anymore. 
So I say to the Minister that as he is the Minister responsible for tertiary education as well and if he really does have a goal or raising the standards of social workers in New Zealand then he has to promote distance education in the social work field. He has to promote the involvement of the private sector in that because the polytechnics and the universities will simply not be able to provide the number of courses needed. He needs to have a holistic approach to this issue and he has to tell himself that the raising of standards starts at home. He is the Minister responsible for social services and it is up to him to sort out the problems in that department. If it is because the structure of the department is obsolete and we need to look at different models then he needs to do that before he tries to regulate everyone.