United Future
Hon Peter Dunne

Peter Dunne speech - 3rd reading Families Commission Bill

 It is so proud it is such a deep commitment that just 9 weeks ago, for the first time in that 67 years, it appointed a family spokesperson, the member who took a point of order recently. I have listened to this debate today with extraordinary amazement. I have been in this House long enough to think I have seen most things, but I have seldom seen a debate like this one, so lacking in argument and substance, and so dripping in petty jealousy from members opposite. Their arguments have nothing to do with whether a Families Commission should be established. They have everything to do with the fact that we promised one would be established, we are getting one established, and we will ensure that it is adequately resourced to do the job it is expected to do, and those opposition members do not like it. They claim that we should support all sorts of other organisations. They fail to say that every single one of the organisations they have named supports the establishment of the Families Commission. Every single one of them says: “We want this commission in place. We see the value it can bring. We look forward to it beginning its operations because we want to work alongside it.” The only problem is the National, New Zealand First, Green, and ACT parties have a different view. I want to say that—and I want to say it very clearly, and I will say it to John Carter because he is the one person opposite who is capable of listening and understanding it, if he gets off the telephone long enough—United Future will not support any future Government that does not support the Families Commission. My comment about the member who is just leaving the Chamber was that her comments today in strong opposition to the Families Commission I suspect would come as a surprised to her leader, Dr Brash, because he starts to talk about building wider coalitions. Let me repeat what I have just said. Any party that does not support the Families Commission will not have the support of United Future in Government, period. That point needs to be understood not as a game of one-upmanship.

Jim Peters: We’re all shaking over here.

Hon PETER DUNNE: The member opposite does not count. He knows it. He will go back to the far north, go fishing, and we will be none the sadder for his departure. Let me make this point.

Jim Peters : The member doesn’t know about these issues.

Hon PETER DUNNE : The member opposite knows does he? Let me say to Mr Peters that he may not know it, but most people around New Zealand laugh at him. I will move on from there. This commission—

Jim Peters : The member doesn’t know!

Hon PETER DUNNE : It is the truth. The member might not like the truth, but it is the truth. People will be rocking in the aisles right now at the thought of this member interjecting. As for Mrs Stewart, they do not even know who she is. I come back to the Families Commission. The reason this commission is being established is because when we look a little bit under the veneer of New Zealand society, the statistics about the state of our families are appalling. We have the world’s second highest rate of single-parent families. We have 65 percent of our young male offenders being brought up in homes without a father figure present. We have 40 percent of our criminals aged between 14 and 18. The member who is attempting to interject said that the problem is that we are taking too diverse an approach. I say to that member that the reality is that families in New Zealand come in all shapes and sizes. Families in New Zealand do have a whole variety of structures. If we are to tackle the problems, and let us get real for a moment, yes the two-parent family, mum and dad family is the ideal we can strive for, but it is actually a minority in contemporary New Zealand. If we are to strive for that ideal we do not  start by saying to a whole range of family structures, and their children, that they are automatically excluded and do not count. We will not make progress that way. We have to say that the ideal is as we have said, and will continue to say, the two-parent family. The reality is often somewhat different, but we need to work with all groups if we are to achieve that ideal in time. I cannot understand members opposite who seriously think that by somehow setting New Zealander against New Zealander, because that is the implication of what they are saying, we will build a cohesive society, and we will build a country where our families feel included. We will do something about addressing those statistics I mentioned a moment or two ago. The member who spoke before asked about the situation in the Wairarapa and those families there. We will not turn dysfunction around overnight. We will also not make any change carrying on the way are. This House has seen more emphasis on families in the last 15 months since this party had a prominent role than in the years beforehand. I say to the Minister of Finance that in the Budget this year by my count 15 family-specific initiatives were introduced. That is far more than in any previous Budget in my time in this House. If it takes the influence of United Future to achieve that, and if it takes the prospect of a Families Commission to achieve that, well and good, because it is a vast change from the days when members opposite were around and nothing happened. The legacy of their tenure is reflected in many of the problems we face today. For those same people to now say a constructive effort, $28 million over 4 years to deal with a problem that conservatively costs New Zealand $5.6 billion every year is excessive is irresponsible and wasteful is simply nonsensical. We have to make a start. If we really believe that this country functions well when its families function well,

If we really believe that families are at the cornerstone of our society, if we really believe that every child deserves the best possible start in life, then we will get behind structures, organisations, policies, and plans to achieve that. We will not sit here whingeing, moaning, and begrudging positive effort. That is all this debate is about. When one sums it up, the Opposition is saying “It’s not fair. You’re doing it. We’re not.” There is nothing more to it than that. That is the reason Opposition members play games in the select committee. That is the reason they do not like the fact that their game-playing was pointed out. That is the reason for the bilious interjections we are getting at the moment. It is simply a case of “You’re doing it. We’re not. It’s not fair.” Up and down New Zealand the families of New Zealand do not take any notice of that. If the Families Commission is such an appalling idea and was ridiculed up and down the country, why have there been 170-odd applications for appointment to the commission? Why has every family group and social agency up and down New Zealand been attacking my office and the Minister of Social Development’s office pleading for application forms so that they can nominate people who they think can make a contribution to the work of this commission? The reality is that New Zealand is crying out for some leadership in this area. It is crying out for a body that will at last put an emphasis and a focus on family life in New Zealand. It is a great tragedy—and the member draws in current circumstances, and I say this when I see the member for Wairarapa—at a time when family stress and tension is on our national conscience, that they play the sort of games they are doing at the moment. It is a great tragedy that we cannot come together at this time to say that this is an initiative that has a chance of succeeding, let us get behind it, let us make it work, instead of playing narrow, cheap political games, sneering, moaning, whining, and otherwise behaving in a generally unctuous and unacceptable manner.