John MacDonald: Should we keep treating 10-year-olds as criminals?

If someone is 10 years old, they aren't legally allowed to smoke. They aren’t legally allowed to drink alcohol, and they’re not really allowed to have their own Facebook page, but they can be held criminally responsible for violent crimes such as murder or manslaughter.  

And the new Chief Children’s Commissioner, Dr Claire Achmad, says that’s crazy and wants the minimum age of criminal responsibility to be raised from 10 to 14.  

And my head agrees with her, but my heart doesn’t. 

So the Children's Commissioner is saying today that, when a child commits a crime, it means they are struggling and they should be helped —not punished— and she wants to see changes in how we deal with these kids. 

A surprising thing is the Prime Minister’s response to this call for change, but I’ll get to that. 

It’s not as if the Chief Children’s commissioner is a lone voice in all of this. Last year, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child said New Zealand should raise the age of criminality to 14. 

It said that our approach focuses too much on the offence and not the fact that these offenders are young kids and, because they’re kids, they should be treated differently. 

The year before that —in 2022— the then children’s commissioner called for the age to be lifted to, at least, 14, but preferably 15 or 16. 

So this has been building momentum. 

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith doesn’t appear to be in favour of any change - saying that special provisions are made for criminal kids. The Prime Minister's door seems to be slightly ajar, not completely closed, to the idea. 

He said yesterday that the Government would need to have “a proper consideration; a proper discussion” before making any moves to change the minimum age. 

He went on to say: “We have real challenges in serious youth offending. Again, it comes down to quite a relatively small group, but certainly the age of some of those young offenders have got younger and younger over time.” 

And he said while raising the minimum age of criminal responsibility isn't a priority right now, “we’re open for doing whatever it takes, and we’re open for considering lots of new, bold, brave ideas”. 

Maybe the “bold and brave” part of that would be taking on the risk of a public backlash. Because there’s no shortage of people who think, whatever someone’s age, they should face the full consequences of their actions. 

And I know that, if one of these ratbags we’re talking about was to commit a serious crime that affected me, I’d want the book thrown at them. 

Maybe I’m underestimating myself there. And this is what I’m getting at when I say my heart tells me that the age of criminality shouldn’t be raised from 10 to 14.  

Whereas my head tells me that what the Chief Children’s Commissioner is saying today makes perfect sense. 

Why would you take something like the old ‘lock ‘em up and throw away the key’ approach when you’re dealing with someone so young and someone, you would like to think, has a greater chance of being rehabilitated and changing their ways than someone older? 

In my head, it makes perfect sense not to lump 10-year-olds in with older crims and treat them the same.  

That’s what the Chief Children’s Commissioner is saying today, and she says there’s evidence to prove that we’re doing things wrong. 

Dr Achmad says it’s out-of-step with what science tells us about brain development in young people and it’s out-of-step with New Zealand’s international obligations and duties under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. 

She says: “When a child criminal

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Canterbury Morning's Podcast with John McDonald
from News Talk ZB.

Speaker 2 (00:12):
Have a thing about this. If someone's ten years old,
they aren't legally allowed to smoke, they aren't legally allowed
to drink, and if the ten years old, they're really
not allowed to have their own Facebook page, but they
can be held criminally responsible for violent crimes such as

(00:33):
murder or manslaughter. And the new Chief Children's Commissioner, doctor
Claire Achmad, says that's crazy. She thinks it's nuts, and
she wants the minimum age of criminal responsibility to be
raised from ten to fourteen. This is what she's saying
today and my head agrees with her, but my heart doesn't.

(00:57):
So the Children's commission she's saying today that when a
child commits a crime, it means they are struggling with stuff,
struggling with life, and they should be helped, not punished,
and she wants to see changes and how we deal
with these kids. A surprising thing is the Prime Minister's
response to this call for change, but I'll get to

(01:18):
that in a second. It's not as if the Chief
Children's Commissioner, by the way, as a lone voice in
all of this last year. Just last year, the United
Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child said New
Zealand should raise the age of criminality to fourteen. It's
said our approach with it starting at ten years old
focuses too much on the offense and not the fact

(01:40):
that these offenders are young kids, and because they're kids,
the UN committee said they should be treated differently. Yeah,
before that, in twenty twenty two, the then Children's Commissioner
called for the age to be lifted to at least fourteen,
but preferably fifteen or sixteen. So instead of treading kids

(02:00):
as crims at ten, the previous Children's Commissioner wanted to
go as high as fifteen or sixteen. So this has
been building momentum. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith, this is the
interesting bit. He doesn't appear to be in favor of
any change, saying that special provisions are made for criminal kids.

(02:22):
The Prime Minister, though, and this is the surprising bit
I mentioned earlier, his door seems to be slightly ajar
and not completely closed to this idea, because he said
yesterday that the government would need to have quite a
proper consideration, a proper discussion before making any moves to

(02:42):
change the minimum age, and he went on to say,
we have real challenges in serious youth offending. Again, it
comes down to quite a relatively small group, but certainly
the age of some of those young offenders have got
younger and younger over time. And he said he is
the Prime Minister, he said yesterday while raising the minimum
age of criminal responsibility isn't a priority right now, he said, quote,

(03:07):
we're open for doing whatever it takes, and we're open
for considering lots of new, bold, brave ideas. End of quote.
Now maybe the bold and brave, but there would be
taking on the risk of a public backlash because there's
no shortages there of people who think whatever someone's age,
they should face the full consequences of their actions. And

(03:31):
I know that if one of these rat bags that
we're talking about, I know, if they were to commit
a serious crime that affected me or family or friends,
I'd want the book thrown at them, whatever the rage.
I mean, maybe I'm underresting myself, underestimating myself there, but
this is what I'm getting at when I say my

(03:51):
heart tells me that the age of criminality shouldn't be
raised from ten to fourteen. Whereas my head tells me
that what the Chief Children's Commissioner was saying today makes
perfect sense. I mean, why would you take something like
the old life lock them up, throw them away, you know,
lock them up, throw away the key approach when you're
dealing with someone so young, and someone you would like

(04:14):
to think has a greater chance of being rehabilitated and
a greater chance of changing their ways than someone older.
So in my head, it makes perfect sense not to
lump ten year olds in with older crims and treat
them the same. That's what the Chief Children's Commissioner is
saying today. And she says, there's evidence to prove that
we're doing things wrong, doctor archimand says it's out of

(04:36):
step with what the science is telling us, modern science
is telling us about brain development and young people. And
she says it's also out of step with New Zealand's
international obligations and duties under the UN Convention, the UN
Convention on the Rights of the Child. Here's another quote
she says. There's the Children's Commissioner. She says, quote, when
a child criminally offends, it means that they are struggling,

(04:59):
that their needs aren't being met in one or more ways,
and she reckons we can still hold these kids to
a without punishing them. As I say that, I'm torn
because what she's saying makes sense in my head, but
in the heart of hearts, I can't agree with what
she's calling for. I can't agree with them.

Speaker 1 (05:21):
For more from Category Mornings with John McDonald, listen live
to news talks It'd be Christ Church from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.