Davis Kelvin: Sentencing (Protection of Children from Criminal Offending) Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDavis Kelvin: Sentencing (Protection of Children from Criminal Offending) Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 03 December 2014. Volume:702;Page:1114. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KELVIN DAVIS (Labour—Te Tai Tokerau):I was so enjoying the speech of that member Jonathan Young until he got to those really hurtful things about the previous Labour Government. It is tragic. He was talking about the things that matter so much to New Zealanders such as the safety of our children and those terrible people that are making methamphetamine and doing all those hurtful things and then he himself goes and hurts our feelings by criticising the fantastic previous Labour Government.I just would like to start though with Pita Paraone who earlier this evening spoke about the genesis of this bill. He mentioned the name of the late great Hon Brian Donnelly who was not just a wonderful member of Parliament—I knew him before he was in politics as a fantastic principal up in Whangarei. He was also a fairly handy rugby league player for the Moerewa Tigers in his day. Then we move on to Asenati Lole-Taylor who actually brought this bill to the House. I would just like to acknowledge her.I do have to say though that the Labour Party is not going to support this bill. We do not disagree with the intent of the bill; in fact we agree entirely with the intent of the bill to protect our most vulnerable children. Labour is committed absolutely committed—as are all parties across the House—to protecting the most vulnerable and particularly our children. As Jonathan Young did say anybody who would think of doing something as heinous as baking P in the house in the presence of children deserves the law book to be absolutely thrown at them.The Labour Party is absolutely committed to the physical safety of children. It is committed to preserving the emotional safety of children and the cultural safety of children. It is committed to protecting the educational safety of children. That is why we have spent much of this evening this afternoon and many previous members’ days debating the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill. It is why we always talk about the need for warm dry homes so that children and families are warm and safe. It is why we are always talking about poverty and how we need to expend all our energies in reducing poverty across New Zealand. It is why we talk about our concern about the cost of food and healthy food in particular and also about overcrowding in homes. We talk about these issues because we care about giving our children throughout New Zealand the best start in life.I just want to talk about an incident that happened when I was principal at Kaitāia Intermediate School when the local youth aid officer came into my office and said: “Kelvin we need to take a brother and sister a girl who is year 8 12 years of age and her younger brother year 7 11 years of age for drug testing.” I said: “Oh what—marijuana?”. He said: “No. This is P. We want to test them for P.” I said: “Well why would you suspect that these kids have been doing P?”. He said: “Well to be perfectly honest their parents are doing P. We have interviewed these children and they have a detailed knowledge of how to manufacture P. They can explain in graphic detail how to manufacture P. They can also explain in great detail the process you go through to actually consume it.” He mentioned something about taking light bulbs. Mr Deputy Speaker you were a policeman in your day. Somehow they used broken light bulbs to consume P. So these children had this intimate knowledge that they could explain in quite some detail. At 11 and 12 years of age they could explain how to manufacture and consume P.They actually took these kids away and they did test them and found that no the children had not actually consumed it themselves. But the youth aid officer said to me: “Kelvin they display all the symptoms of somebody who has been using P.” I said: “Well explain to me.” He said: “Well are these kids tired? Do they come to school and fall asleep?”. I said: “Yeah actually they do.” He said: “Well when your parents are having a P binge it makes them hyper. They will stay awake. They will party for 3 4 or 5 days at a time without any sleep. That means these children are also kept awake because their parents are partying with their mates. They can’t get to sleep so they’re also displaying the symptoms of sleep deprivation. Physiologically they just can’t cope with it so they come to school to have a rest.” He said: “Are these kids hungry?”. I said: “Yeah. They’re always hungry. We put on breakfast for them.” He said: “Well that’s another symptom—when the parents are on their P binges they don’t get hungry so they don’t think to go out and buy food for the kids. In fact their minds aren’t in that space where they would think to go and buy food. All the food is used up on day 1 and day 2 of the P binge. The kids go for 4 or 5 days without food in the house so they will turn up to school hungry as well.” He said this is what happens. This is how insidious it is that parents will have this happen to their children.We as parents want to have our children. We want to love them nurture them and make sure they grow up safely. David Clendon has spoken about how his grandkids have come around and you put everything up high so that they cannot have things fall on them and they will not play with the light sockets etc. There are some parents in this world who just absolutely do not give a toss about those little things; they are too busy on these P binges where their kids are sleep-deprived and where they are food-deprived and basically those children are not in a situation where they can actually go to school and learn. They are in danger of just repeating the cycle over and over and over again.The intent of this bill is laudable but we will not support it because the Sentencing Act and the Crimes Act already basically cover the intent of this bill. For example section 152 of the Crimes Act says it is the duty of the parent or guardian to provide necessaries and protect from injury. It says: “Everyone who is a parent or is a person in place of a parent who has actual care or charge of a child under the age of 18 years is under a legal duty—(a) to provide that child with necessaries; and (b) to take reasonable steps to protect that child from injury.”Those parents whom I have spoken about are not taking any steps to protect their children from injury. In fact it was just a wonder that those children had not actually consumed P themselves because if they had they would have been instantly addicted. P is one of the most addictive substances there is. Nicotine is probably the only thing that is more addictive strangely enough. It is just a wonder that those two children whom I described had not actually consumed P and at that stage of their lives had not become addicted to it although I would have concerns now some 7 or 8 years on and I hope that they have not fallen into that lifestyle as well. In fact I have to give them credit for getting themselves up every day getting out of bed getting themselves dressed and getting themselves to school. I was thinking about it and it was probably because school was the one safe place in their lives where they could get up where they could get some sleep in the middle of the day when they are meant to be learning where they could get a decent feed in the mornings and where they were relatively safe.Also the Sentencing Act—I just want to refer to section 9A “Cases involving violence against or neglect of child under 14 years”. Section 9A(2) says: “The court must take into account the following aggravating factors to the extent that they are applicable in the case:”. Section 9A(2)(b) says: “in relation to any harm resulting from the offence any serious or long-term physical or psychological effect on the victim:”. So that is an aggravating factor—taking into account the psychological effect on the victim. I just wonder about the psychological effect that those parents’ behaviour had on their two children. Labour will not be supporting this bill although we do support the intent. Kia ora.