Mahuta Nanaia: Urgent Debates — Office of the Children’s Commissioner—State of Care 2015ReportText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMahuta Nanaia: Urgent Debates — Office of the Children’s Commissioner—State of Care 2015Report[Sitting date: 27 August 2015. Volume:708;Page:6269. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato): It gives me great pleasure to be able to make a contribution to this particular debate. I join with other members of Parliament in congratulating the Children’s Commissioner on releasing a very sobering report about the state of care in New Zealand. I do not think that any family or community is immune from knowing some of the most difficult and challenging issues confronting some of the most vulnerable families in our country but it was not until I got to this part of the report that I got a real sense of how desperate the need is to do something more with Child Youth and Family and with the legislation that it operates under and more important to enable communities to respond in a real way that can address those most difficult issues. When the commissioner said today that we do not know whether children are better off as a result of State intervention but that the implications are not good how can we but sit up and say that more must be done?I absolutely agree with the Minister: there are no quick fixes; this will take some time. But what are the critical things that could happen now that could make a fundamental difference? We understand that those children in care deserve our attention now to ensure that they do not get sucked through the pipeline that will mean that they will end up in youth justice facilities that will mean that they will end up without an education and that will mean that they will end up in our prison system with no hope at all. We cannot let that happen so there are some immediate priorities that must be addressed recognising that a review is taking place and recognising that the Minister is trying to initiate some change at the grassroots level. Here is where the rubber hits the road for many community service organisations that are in this space now and that are trying to ensure that no more children get into a system that is already broken—get into a system that is already broken.I do not accept that this issue is not about resource because I hazard a guess that the Minister has a number of contracts that are actually operating in this particular space on her desk right now ready to be renewed or turned over. The challenge at a community level is whether we have got the networks of support right to be able to intervene in the vulnerable risk end of the spectrum where intervention is needed now. I am not sure whether or not the Ministry of Social Development is providing the type of advice that could help those decisions to prevent children getting into the system so that the major amount of attention can go into fixing what we know is broken—Child Youth and Family. I am concerned about that.The other thing is that we did hear a number of members in the House talking about the ministerial decisions that are currently under way. We all know that when services are picking up vulnerable children it isactually through the way that they are able to share information so that you are able to red flag all the way through the system that things are happening here. When Plunket goes into a household and recognises something does that particular service have the ability to red flag across a range of providers that there is something happening in this family? They are not saying that it requires legislative intervention but they are saying that there is something happening—“Five Eyes”. All the reports that I hear back from good social service providers say that although they are picking up vulnerabilities the ability to share critical information so that other interventions can take place is a little bit clunky and in order to ensure that it can happen we really have got to put some attention there because the legislative obligation of Child Youth and Family actually makes it far more difficult to have the type of necessary preventive responsive support for those who are most vulnerable.How do I know this? Because I have sat in on family group conferences. Oh my gosh! You know when families are asked “What is the solution here? What can we do?” often in some communities there is not actually the service provision supports able to direct families into areas. The other thing is that I have been in a situation where a grandparent has intervened and has picked children from their wider whānau because they do not want their mokopuna sucked into the system. But do you know what? Once those children transfer over to the grandparents Child Youth and Family steps back and the grandparents are trying to scramble with the Ministry of Social Development saying: “Well what am I entitled to to be able to look after these mokopuna?”. They do not want them to go into the State system. They want to be able to look after them but all they have got is the pension. And what is happening with these kids? These are some real-time examples Minister that I know that you are aware of but I know that the system does not allow for the level of responsiveness that is required if we want to ensure that more children are in whānau care.It is a worry to me Minister that 58 percent of children in care and 68 percent of young people in Child Youth and Family residences are Māori. It tells a very chilling story. Many of us in the House know how complicated whānau lives are at the moment. There are a lot of whānau living in blended situations—multiple relationships with a number of children in the household. There are a number of sole-parent households a number of households where one of the parents is incarcerated and a number of households where the impact of financial problems drug and alcohol abuse and all of that cause all these vulnerabilities that start to impact on those most vulnerable in our society—the children. And who picks it up? The schools. They will know pretty quickly whether or not there are some things happening at home that need to be addressed. Nothing can happen in terms of the learning environment of a child unless all of those other vulnerabilities are responded to. Social Workers in Schools helped to make some of the change but the Minister said herself that more dynamic settings are required in today’s society with all these complexities to be able to respond to the needs of children. I agree with that and I do believe that schools are a place to start. However again not enough is happening. Not enough is happening for these particular children.I want to pick up on a point that Alfred Ngaro raised with regard to Pūao-te-ata-tū. That really sits on and is underpinned by the cultural responsiveness recommendation path that the Children’s Commissioneris I think leading the Minister for Social Development’s thoughts down. If iwi are in a position to be able to provide an integrated support system that can work alongside the providers the schools the kōhanga reo and the early childhood centres as well as those State agencies to be able to ensure that children do not get sucked into “the system” and are able to lead full and positive lives within their whānau setting then actually that should be embraced. That should be supported. The question I have which I have asked before of the Minister is: what type of alignment is being envisaged with regard to Whānau Ora? Some of the very best elements of Whānau Ora that are working have got good integrated models here. I am a little bit concerned that perhaps the situation is that Whānau Ora is operating in isolation from some of the very necessary work that is happening in this particular space.Minister there does need to be legislative change—there does need to be legislative change to the extent that will ensure that more of the focus goes into the preventative end and then the statutory end is for only those most severe cases knowing that we are trying to stem the pipeline of actually opening the doors of kids getting in to Child Youth and Family. It concerns me so much when I hear in neonatal intensive care unit centres—certainly in my own area—that there is an absolute fear of young parents who are having children. Then they get somebody snooping around to say: “Oh gosh. Here is a young Māori parent. They are vulnerable. They might get reported and their kid might get picked up.” It concerns me that that type of culture could be something that is more the norm than is not but I have heard that it is the case. Again if this is what the legislative mechanism is creating it is a real fear amongst people who want to be parents but are really fearful of how the legislation might actually go over the top of them and that is not going to be the way to go either.Finally can I say that there are a number of service providers social workers and community and voluntary organisations that know this space better than any one of us in this House. What they are saying is that sadly yes it is actually about resources. It is about a bit more fluidity in the system. It is about ensuring that the legislative mechanism actually defers to the well-being of the child and the reintegration of children back into their whānau and about ensuring that those supports are measured and monitored or looked at along the way until the child is in a good place of care. We cannot have them in prisons. We need to do more.