Menéndez March Ricardo; O'Connor GregRICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green): I'm rising on behalf of the Greens to speak to the Oranga Tamariki (Repeal of Section 7AA) Amendment Bill and I'd like to acknowledge the ACT Party member Karen Chhour for sharing her lived experience with us. We acknowledge that she has made genuinely positive contributions to our political debates regarding the state of the so-called care in this country. The Greens are saddened to actually see that being undermined by this bill because while I want to uphold the lived experience that each of us—including her—bring to Parliament it's important to recognise that as legislators there is a limit to each of our lived experiences and that we actually lean on a collective range of lived experiences to inform the pieces of legislation that we debate. There are many reasons why the Greens cannot be supporting this bill. These include things like this bill running counter to Puao-te-ata-tu it runs counter to the Waitangi Tribunal rulings and it runs counter to the calls from VOYCE - Whakarongo Mai and the Office of the Children's Commissioner and the interim report of the royal commission into abuse in care. Why it is particularly disappointing is because over the course of this term the ACT Party and the Greens despite all of our differences actually had found common ground in holding and challenging the Labour Government to account for ignoring these same voices on the Oranga Tamariki Oversight Bill. But we do want to acknowledge that now when it suits their political narratives they do the exact same things: ignoring the voices that have said that we do not need a repeal of section 7AA and that actually having a Tiriti framework in these systems is clearly important. So disappointment" is honestly an understatement. I acknowledge that many of us are leaning into our lived experience but I would like to lean on the lived experiences of others who have contributed actually for several decades to this debate and let me take us back to the late 1980s around when I was born. Puao-te-ata-tu in the report noted that "At the heart of the issue"—and I'm quoting—"is a profound misunderstanding or ignorance of the place of the child in Maori society and its relationship with whanau hapu iwi structures." It continues saying that "We have been disturbed at the extent to which Social Welfare institutions and indeed the courts have a clientele which is predominantly Maori. We think that as a society we cannot survive much longer if we continue to ignore these facts and the situation which gave rise to them." If this is the feedback that we've been receiving back then and it actually reflects the feedback that we continue to get it shows that rather than dismantling Tiriti provisions we do need to strengthen it. Yes our Oranga Tamariki system is in dire need of overhaul but that won't come by removing Tiriti provisions. If we move a bit closer to today to some of the commentary from the Children's Commissioner—which like I said the ACT Party was in support of kind of having a stronger Children's Commissioner and having it being independent and they know that—it is that "To keep pēpi in the care of their whānau Māori must be recognised as best placed to care for their own: this involves by Māori for Māori approaches that are enabled by the transfer of power and the resources from government to Māori." If we want to recognise that the Children's Commissioner has played a historical and important role in that monitoring and holding those entities to account I think we should be taking these statements very very seriously. Even more recently if we go to 2021 the Waitangi Tribunal also found that "The disparities we examine are both enduring and stark. … Between 2000 and 2018 the incidence of tamariki Māori aged 16 and under in State care rose from one in every 125 children to one in every 64. By 2012 tamariki Māori were five times more likely than their non-Māori counterparts to enter State care." They continue talking about how the Crown and Tribunal recognised that it was "unacceptable and that … the Treaty of Waitangi would require that"—actually that this is a sign that we have failed our Tiriti obligations and that we actually as a Government should take "active and positive steps … to address the disparity." At no point did they actually suggest that removing Tiriti provisions would go some ways towards that because as tauiwi the Tiriti provisions—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member's time has expired."