Legislation to protect vulnerable children needs strengthening

The New Zealand Law Society has told the select committee considering the Vulnerable Children Bill that it supports initiatives to protect vulnerable children, but the bill’s framework needs to be strengthened.

Law Society spokesperson Professor Bill Atkin says the bill’s objective of protecting vulnerable children is admirable, and if government agencies work together in the spirit of the bill’s purpose and intention, many at-risk children will benefit.

However, the bill as currently drafted fails to achieve its goals.

“The Law Society has identified significant aspects of the bill that need to be strengthened in order for the bill to achieve its objective,” Professor Atkin says.

“The definition of vulnerable children is central to the bill so it is imperative that a clear definition is provided. It is also essential that the children’s teams and vulnerable children’s board are established and their respective roles and jurisdictions set out in the legislation, to provide them with legal authority for intervention.”

The framework for collaboration between government agencies would also be strengthened by requiring the children’s ministers to consult with the Office of the Children’s Commissioner in respect of setting priorities and preparing plans to improve the well-being of children.

Professor Atkin says the bill should require that agencies’ child protection policies are audited, to ensure there is consistency across the different agencies.

The bill also allows for Child Harm Prevention Orders (CHPO) to be made which may impose considerable limitations on a person’s freedom of movement and association. Regardless of the bill stating that the orders are not intended to punish, their effect is punitive.

“The legislation allows a person to be tagged with the stigma of having committed a serious offence on the basis of a significantly lower civil law standard of the balance of probabilities. That sets a very concerning precedent. The proper forum in which to decide whether a person has committed an offence is a criminal trial,” Professor Atkin says.

Law Society spokesperson Allan Cooke told the social services select committee that the bill’s goal of protecting children and young people and promoting permanent placements will not be achieved.

“The bill prevents the use of service orders which is the primary vehicle used to support these families and replaces the orders with a duty on the state to provide assistance in certain circumstances. The criteria have a high threshold, are too restrictive and provide no certainty to caregivers about whether they will obtain support.

“It breaches the social contract between the chief executive and those caregivers who have agreed to provide a permanent home for a child or young person, who would otherwise be in state care,” Mr Cooke says.

© Scoop Media