Wood Michael; Mallard TrevorMICHAEL WOOD (Labour—Mt Roskill): About a month ago I ran a public meeting in my constituency about the issue of crime. We got on to a discussion with people in the audience about the growth of the methamphetamine industry and the serious social consequences that stem from that. A woman in the audience stood up to speak to this issue. She was a Māori woman probably in her 40s who later in life has decided to at considerable sacrifice and cost train to be a social worker. She saw a need in the community and is trying to meet that.What she relayed in her heartfelt comments to that public meeting was the way in which failings in our system of State care over the years—in particular the uplifting of Māori children and the uprooting of them from their whānau and their hapū and their community—had caused irredeemable damage to those young people particularly the young men. She related that it had left them without a sense of identity and had often led to situations of abuse and disconnection to the point where those young men were easy prey to the gangs—the gangs that have gone on to form such a pernicious part of the criminal underworld in our society. Her story was incredibly powerful and has shaped my thinking in respect of this legislation. She told us what we have got wrong. No one is saying that what we have got at the moment is perfect and I must say that at this point.I contrasted that with one of the very best—very short—submissions I read as part of preparing for this legislation. It was from a woman called Ana Morrison and I just want to read directly out of it because it speaks to what we can do when we get it right. She says: Our whanau has a personal experience of where the current system nearly failed for our mokopuna. In our case it was the CYF case worker having a personal knowledge of whakapapa (they were from the same hapu as our whanau) and them complying with the strong legislative requirement"—that is in the current Act—"to look to the wider (very extended) whanau and hapu for placement options—that prevented our nephew being lost to the system." as the young men I just spoke about in the other example were. "He now has been adopted by his Great Aunt and has the life he is entitled to—he is connected with his wider whanau participates in iwi activities attends a rumaki unit (learning te reo and tikanga) knows his whakapapa has cousins of similar age that he now has contact and strong relationships with and is a thriving happy Māori boy with a bright future and most importantly … has not had to experience life as a ward of the State …".Those are the contrasts and what I know is that every member of this House wants that outcome. I know that. I do not think there is any member who comes to this House wanting anything other than that. So it is with more a sense of sorrow than anger that the Labour Party says that we have to stand and oppose this legislation today because of what it does in respect of reducing the obligations that we have for appropriate whānau and hapū placement. Then there are the Minister's comments throughout the course of the difference stages of debate. We have heard her at different times say "No no no—it's still in there." Well I am afraid that when we are dealing with a situation in which 60 percent of the children who are uplifted are Māori we should be listening to the Māori voice in this debate. When we have people like Prue Kapua from the Māori Women's Welfare League stating very clearly that this legislation "is really focused around one or two things which if we boil it down [is] a safe loving and stable family"—good—"and early intervention"—good—"for which you really read early removal so people don't have a number of placements".The absolute view that has come through submission after submission from considered practitioners in this area—social workers; Andrew Becroft the Children's Commissioner; Prue Kapua; and most iwi and hapū groups who have submitted—is that this legislation waters down those obligations those important obligations for whānau and hapū placement that Ana Morrison spoke about.There would be good will enough across this House—and across the community—to work through this issue. There are good things in this legislation that the Labour Party has acknowledged through the different stages of debate but this question of whānau and hapū placement and the way it has been diminished within this legislation is so fundamental that we simply cannot stand and support this legislation and that for us is a matter of considerable regret. A Labour Government will come back to this issue. We have got to get it right. But the approach we will take is one to listen. We have to have a little bit of humility within this issue—the capacity and the willingness to listen to those who know this area to listen to those who submitted so passionately about this issue and that is what the Labour Government will do after September. Thank you.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Louisa Wall—again 5 minutes."