0 Protecting our most vulnerable (Part One)

Parliament yesterday passed the Third Reading of the Vulnerable Children Bill. Sadly (and inexplicably), Parliament was not in unison on this legislation; the final vote was 105-10, with the Greens and Hone Harawira voting against; more on that later.

Paula Bennett has hailed the passage of this legislation:

Social Development Minister Paula Bennett has welcomed the passing of the Vulnerable Children Bill into law ensuring that New Zealand’s most at risk children get priority in accessing services and support.
“With more than 30 specific initiatives contained within the Children’s Action Plan, this new legislation provides a solid platform of accountability and monitoring never before seen in child protection to underpin the plan,” says Mrs Bennett.
The Vulnerable Children Act confers responsibility on the heads of five government departments, holding them directly accountable for improving the lives of vulnerable children.
The Ministries of Health, Education, Social Development, Justice and Police frontline staff must now ensure that children identified as vulnerable get the services and support they need to thrive.
“Every child in this country deserves good health, education and welfare.  Most parents provide that but for those who can’t or won’t, government agencies must step in and be advocates for those children.  I expect these children to now go to the front of the queue,” says Mrs Bennett. 
The 10 new Children’s Teams, two of which are up and running now, will provide a coordinated group of professionals to plan and wrap services around at risk children early to keep them safe from harm so they can thrive, achieve and belong.
The new law introduces new vetting and screening checks for government and community agency staff working with children including banning people with serious convictions from working in core children workforce roles.
The legislation switches the onus on parents who have killed or severely abused or neglected a child.  They will now have to prove they are safe to parent subsequent children.
Other changes include greater clarity in Family Group Conference plans that specify exactly what parents will need to do to meet their children’s needs.  Children in care will also be enrolled in the Kiwisaver scheme, allowing better planning for their future.
“While no law can stop children being abused, neglected or killed, this new legislation transforms our child protection system.  It means there will more eyes on vulnerable children, services and support will be prioritised and there will be greater vigilance on known abusers,” says Mrs Bennett.

The Vulnerable Children Bill is not perfect, and there is no guarantee that it will protect every child in New Zealand. But it is definitely a step in the right direction, and we especially applaud the added responsibility given to heads of government departments instructing them to work closely with other departments, and holding them accountable for that.

In her Third Reading speech yesterday Paula Bennett had this to say:

This Bill is a critical step in giving effect to changes in the Children’s Action Plan.
These include ensuring joint accountability across Justice, Health, Education, Police and Social Development, for the wellbeing of vulnerable children.
They also include the new requirements for the screening and vetting of Government workers and contractors who work with children.
All up these new requirements will cover around 182,000 New Zealanders.
There are also new workforce restrictions to prevent those with serious convictions, who pose a danger to children, from coming into contact with them. 
The legislation will also switch the onus on parents who have killed, or severely abused or neglected a child, and they will now have to prove they are safe to parent subsequent children.   
But let me be very clear, the legislation contained in this Bill is a small part of work already underway.
We can pass laws to improve screening and vetting.
We can pass laws that place restrictions on dangerous people where there currently are none.
But we cannot pass laws that stop children being beaten, neglected, or sexually and emotionally abused.
We cannot pass laws that stop children being killed, by those who should love and protect them.
We cannot expect that throwing more money at this problem - without changing how we work - will actually fix anything.
Accepting that this is as good as it gets will not cut it.

This is a pretty emphatic statement from the Minister of Social Development. She and her Ministry have been working on these proposals for several years. Mrs Bennett launched the White Paper on Vulnerable Children in 2012, which received more that 10,000 submissions. She told Parliament that the legislation passed yesterday "would be nothing" without those submissions.

Labour supported the passage of the Bill. Sue Moroney began her Third Reading speech with these words:

It is a pleasure to rise to speak at the third reading of the legislation formerly part of the Vulnerable Children Bill. I congratulate the Minister for Social Development on bringing the legislation forward and bringing it all the way through to its third reading in a timely fashion. I also want to commend the work that was done at the Social Services Committee on the Vulnerable Children Bill, because I think that it did improve the bill, and we were able to ensure, I guess, that some of the more problematic parts of that bill were taken out, actually. That was what happened; quite a significant part of that bill was taken out. I also want to acknowledge Anthea Simcock from the Child Matters organisation in Hamilton, because I understand that quite a lot of what has ended up in this legislation has been as result of her advocacy around the issues for children who are vulnerable, and vulnerable to child abuse. I think we should just call it what it is, quite frankly. So I congratulate Anthea on her involvement in this.

Parliament is by its very nature an adversarial place. But the two main parties were able to find common ground yesterday. 

New Zealand First too found general agreement with the Bill; here's what Asenati Lole-Taylor had to say in her introductory remarks:

Talofa lava, kia ora, and thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to talk about this legislation, arising from the Vulnerable Children Bill, in its third and final reading. The legislation sets out to achieve some goals. It proposes solutions that are much needed for problems, given the epidemic that has been in existence for quite a while in New Zealand. We are all aware that problems associated with vulnerable children are complex, and so the solutions identified in this legislation may only go so far. The member who has just spoken, Alfred Ngaro, is absolutely right: it is not perfect legislation; not yet. Obviously, we need to look at this legislation carefully because there are underlying issues that must be clarified.

There will undoubtably still be challenges ahead, and the Government freely concedes that the legislation is not yet perfect. But it has passed into law, despite the Greens and Hone Harawira not being able to bring themselves to support it, for wholly political reasons.

We will examine those reasons in Part Two later today.

0 Tracy was tough, but Duncan's even tougher!

If Winston Peters thought Tracy Watkins was tough on him and Winston First yesterday, we hope he didn't read Duncan Garner's Dom-Post column. Headed Is this all you have, Winston? Garner is absolutely brutal on Peters; he begins thus:

Poor Winston, what's going on? It looks like you're really struggling to land any decent hits in Parliament these days. It all looks a bit limp and sad.
You've been there since 1978, save for three years in the wilderness before this term. If you ever had the answers then you've had ample time to share them.
Instead, what did we see this week? You abusing your privilege of free speech by spewing vicious bile at an MP who is in Parliament only because you wanted him there. Brendan Horan is hardly the first NZ First MP selected for loyalty rather than ability.
Calling Horan the "Jimmy Savile of New Zealand politics" was evil and cowardly – and you know it. If anyone makes any sort of claim against you, you're quick to threaten legal action and demand retractions and apologies. But when you're the one dishing it out those rules don't apply: you can waltz into Parliament and get all the protection you need. 

"Evil and cowardly"; that's as trenchant a statement as we've seen a New Zealand journalist make against an MP for many years. And Duncan Garner doesn't do it under parliamentary privilege either!

Garner continues:

I can't help but point out the irony of it all to you. I remember covering a speech you made in Kawerau in 2008 and you had Horan along as your little sycophantic sidekick.
Horan was in awe of you, banging on to the journos about how you were an honest and loyal man who only wanted what was right for New Zealand. He told us you never took money from Owen Glenn and everyone was wrong to be questioning your integrity and honesty. Horan was really fired up that afternoon.
So how does it feel now he's firing a few at you? Suddenly the spending from your parliamentary leader's fund looks questionable – despite your denials.
And Horan's allegations might just be sticking too. Did you spend $20,000 on a computer system to aid your NZ First Party? That money you and all the other parties have in those slush funds has never been transparent.
Last week, before all this chaos, you were promising to take out Judith Collins. But when you pulled out your gun it merely went pop. 

But then comes the really scary bit:

Yet, despite your miserable week, I still can't write you off.
I was there in 1996 when you promised to get rid of Jim Bolger, Bill Birch and Jenny Shipley. I remember chasing you down Lambton Quay for weeks during the coalition negotiations. You loved the attention and you're at it again.
Here we are 18 years later and not much has really changed. You're still the potential king-maker and you like it like that.
David Cunliffe has flung the door open to you by shunning the Greens' offer to campaign as a Labour-Greens government.
That suits you – we know you don't like the Greens. It's why you couldn't go with Labour in 1996 – you didn't want to share power with the Alliance in a three-party coalition. 
Now we're back to square one. You've started talking about "bottom lines" again. Yet on really simple, straightforward questions you refuse to give a straightforward answer.
Yes, you've had some victories over the years, free healthcare for the under 6s and the Gold Card – but is there anything else after 36 years?
Now immigration is bubbling away as an issue again – just like 1996 all over again.
Yes, 98,000 people arrived in New Zealand last year and 65,000 left – but the fact is most of those coming here were Kiwis returning home. A small fraction of them were actually immigrants from another land. But let's not let the facts get in the way during the election campaign.
Really, Winston, I reckon the public is tired of all these silly games. It feels like you've become entertainment for the stupid and sycophantic, who don't take the state of the nation too seriously at all.
But still I think you'll scrape together the 5 per cent support to make it back to Parliament (which, of course, means that 95 per cent of voters don't want you). But 5 per cent is all you need and that will be enough to make John Key's life hell.
After 36 years, is the nuisance factor really all you have to offer? 

Yes Dear Readers; it's 36 years since Winston Peters first entered Parliament in 1978. And what does he have to show for it. He's been a Minister three times, without ever having served a full three-year term. Jim Bolger and Jenny Shipley fired him, and Helen Clark stood him down over the Owen Glenn donation and all the lies he told about that. He's brought such characters as Tuku "Underpants" Morgan, Ron "Fingers" Mark, Richard "Wogistan" Prosser, Andrew "Leaky" Williams and Asenati Lole-Taylor into Parliament. He has attacked immigrants, especially Chinese immigrants.

What will be Winston's legacy? A career of unfulfilled potential? New Zealand's pre-eminent conspiracy theorist? A lifetime achievement award for his contribution to the whisky industry? Or will a seat be saved in his honour at the Green Parrot Cafe in Wellington?

Winston Peters was once one of the most formidable politicians in New Zealand. In 2014 however, he is a far cry from that. The elderly and the rednecks may get him back for one more term, but it will be tight.  We really hope that come election night, Winston First falls slightly below the 5% mark.

There should be no place in our Parliament for a man who, under parliamentary privilege, likens another MP to an alleged serial child abuser and paedophile. Kudos to Duncan Garner for his denouncement of Peters' actions this week.

0 Watkins on "flaky" Winston First

Tracy Watkins doesn't mince words today. Under the headline Party in danger of Peter-ing out she opines:

Anyone who kids themselves that there is life after Winston Peters for NZ First only had to watch the party floundering in the absence of its leader this week.
Frantically trying to head off an attack by their former colleague, expunged NZ Firster Brendan Horan, Peters' front bench achieved the seemingly impossible feat of making Horan look good by comparison.
They were clueless in the face of Horan's determination to extract utu from his former party by tabling documents he claimed showed improper use of the taxpayer funded leader's fund.
Whether the documents do show what Horan claims remains to be seen; the Speaker is investigating although the explanation offered by Peters suggests the spending complies with the rules. But we know from long experience that politicians have a collective interest in not inquiring too deeply into the use of leaders' funds.
There is certainly no reason to be confident that they have cleaned up their act since an Audit Office inquiry several years ago found most parties treated it as a slush fund for party political activities. (NZ First was one of the parties pinged for unlawful spending to the tune of $158,000).
Regardless of the ins and outs of Horan's allegations, however, one thing seems clear: Horan is hellbent on using his last remaining months in Parliament to try to take Peters and the rest of NZ First down with him.
Even if he succeeds he will only be hastening by a few years what increasingly seems inevitable.
With its leader knocking 70, NZ First is a clock that has been slowly winding down since the 1996 election delivered Peters the balance of power. 

This is brutal stuff from Ms Watkins, but it is is also brutally honest. There is no way that New Zealand First will survive without its founder and cult leader. The ineptitude of the NZF caucus was there for all to see this week.

Tracy Watkins goes on to profile some of the more "colourful" members of the Winston First caucus:

Since the party's return in 2011, Parliament has been collectively holding its breath waiting for the current team to implode given some of the more eccentric selections - like former North Shore mayor Andrew Williams, notorious for urinating in a public place. 
The implosion hasn't happened yet but there have been plenty of flaky moments. Richard Prosser launched a diatribe against Muslims that prompted hundreds of complaints to the NZ First board. The party's Pasifika MP, Asenati Lole-Taylor, famously asked questions of the police minister in Parliament about blow jobs and has carved out a cult following on Twitter for her bizarre outbursts. Her most recent was to accuse a press gallery journalist of cyber bullying after he referred to her "shooting the messenger". Lole-Taylor thought he was alleging she had shot an actual parliamentary messenger. Horan, meanwhile, was dumped from the party over allegations of missing money from his dead mother's estate.
Horan's bitterness over his expulsion from the party is probably made even more visceral for his belief in himself as the obvious successor to Peters. A former TV weather presenter, Horan was noted for making sure he was always in screen shot when Peters was stopped on the way to the House.
Peters' dislike for his former MP, meanwhile, seems to run particularly deep, with his attack in Parliament on Horan as New Zealand's "Jimmy Savile" - a reference to Britain's celebrity child molester - plumbing the depths of personal attack. 

Asenati Lole-Taylor's Twitter feud with 3News journalist Lloyd Burr was somewhat surreal. It's fair to say that there are a number of MP's in the House with a better command of English than Asenati (perhaps as many as 120 more), but she made an absolute goose of herself, and not for the first time. In the past Ms Lole-Taylor has drawn attention to herself by gleefully announcing on a daily basis how many Twitter users she had blocked that day for daring to have a contrary opinion to hers!

Winston First may squeak back in at September's General Election. However we wouldn't put money on it; Peters himself is a pale shadow of the brash young man on 1996. In recent weeks he has looked far from well and we genuinely wonder if he can pick himself up for one final campaign. He will have to, because none of his current caucus looks capable of winning a chook raffle at the local pub, let alone winning votes in an election.

Father Time has not treated Winston Peters kindly; the late nights, fags and whisky have taken a cumulative toll. And it may well be Father Time who determines whether Winston First survives beyond 20 September 2014.