SpeechHARETE HIPANGO (National): I stand with the distinct privilege but also responsibility as spokesperson for the National Party with the portfolio of children and Oranga Tamariki. I'm always cognisant when I do speak in an advocacy role for our children of the importance of their voice not only being heard but being listened to. I address the House this evening on the Oversight of Oranga Tamariki System and Children and Young People's Commission Bill at this second reading with considerable concern and consternation on behalf of the children our children of Aotearoa New Zealand who are in State welfare care—not so wel"; in fact "ill-fared" care with the oversight of this bill. As indicated speaking for the National Party it's a privilege. But I speak this evening on the importance of our children's voices and their views being not only heard and paid lip-service to but listened to and heeded by this Government. For the public who may be listening to this debate this evening the purpose of a second reading is that with the first reading of the bill it's passed over to the select committee and open for public submission and then scrutiny. So this second reading also is about reporting back to the House after having listened to the public opinion after having scrutinised the law to improve it before it goes to what the next stage will be the committee of the whole House for further scrutiny and amendment of a bill that is deeply flawed and does not serve the interests of our children in State welfare care. So the second reading is very much about reporting back to the House what that scrutiny was and what the public submission was. The report back to the House is some 18 pages long. The National Party with the ACT Party with the Green Party and with the Māori Party have all filed opposing views to this bill. That in itself speaks volumes but importantly it is the volume of the voice that has been extinguished by this Labour Government and by the Labour members of the select committee when those submissions and presentations were made. In effect the submitters with their submissions have been placed into a very submissive position by this Government. So I now quote importantly what I think encapsulates what this bill should be about and what this Government should be doing in heeding the voice and the views of our children. Dame Whina Cooper said "Take care of our children. Take care of what they hear take care of what they see take care of what they feel. For how the children grow so will be the shape of Aotearoa." There are a total of 403 submissions that were received by the select committee; 311 of those were expressly opposed to this bill and only eight in support. We heard oral submissions from 96 spokespersons and significantly the voice and the voices representing those children of experience in State care: VOYCE Whakarongo Mai Voice of the Young and Care Experienced. The National Party's minority view along with the members of the other political parties' have been detailed in the select committee report. I acknowledge that there is so much that has been canvassed and there will be lengthy debate at the committee of the whole House in terms of proposed improvements and amendments to this bill that is fatally flawed. I say it's fatally flawed because the fact is that the majority of the public views voices and submissions and from VOYCE Whakarongo representing and an advocacy body on behalf of those children who have been in State care are saying this bill will not work. Effectively what the Government has proposed to do in listening to bureaucrats in ivory towers is displacing dismissing dispensing with those with lived experience of care in the State welfare system of those with lived experience advocating—legal experts family lawyers family law academics professors—and importantly our community and voluntary sector organisations working in this space. So importantly also what this bill is attempting to do with its oversight—which in my view and the view of the public is a massive oversight and dispensation and dismissal of what the public concerns are—is not only seeking to disband the Office of the Children's Commissioner not only gagging the commissioner but effectively disembowelling the office effectively decapitating power to truth by setting up—and that was done back in July 2019—an Independent Children's Monitor which this Government for some reason considers to be independent when it was positioned in part of the Ministry of Social Development a Government bureaucratic agency but now sidestepped into the Education Review Office. So the function of the Children's Commissioner Judge Francis Eivers and her office which was about monitoring investigation of complaints on behalf of children and their families and advocacy is dismantled into three separate components and entities of the Independent Children's Monitor. This was a done deal. Even before this bill came to select committee it was a done deal because back in July 2019 the Minister had set up the Independent Children's Monitor. Effectively the resourcing had been repositioned into the Office of the Ombudsman to deal with investigation of complaints. And the Minister said this evening that the Office of the Children's Commissioner has had to refer a number of those to the Ombudsman's office. Well one really should look at the resourcing. The Office of the Children's Commissioner is resourced at $13 million compared to the Ombudsman's office of $40 million. It's under-resourced and the expectation for the Office of the Children's Commissioner to continue under-resourced is unreasonable and unfair. This bill is flawed because it takes the view that the oversight—separating what the Office of the Children's Commissioner internationally renowned and a template for children's advocacy was doing so well as truth to power by disestablishing disembowelling decapitating and removing its effective function into what will be a commission and a board. So three separate entities of a Children's Commissioner board an Independent Children's Monitor and the Office of the Ombudsman to do what will be disconnected disjointed and will not have any measure of coherence or cohesion in representing best the interests and the voices of our children of Aotearoa New Zealand in State welfare care. My time is almost up. This bill is significantly one that is flawed. The Government should heed and listen to the voices of our children who are care experienced and take that on board. We do not commend this bill to the House."