7. Benefits—Entitlements and Welfare FraudHon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō) to the Minister for Social DevelopmentBenefits—Entitlements and Welfare Fraud7. Hon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō) to the Minister for Social Development: Does she stand by all her policies and actions in the social development portfolio?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development): Absolutely.Hon Louise Upston: Is it still the Government's policy that if someone is found to have dishonestly claimed a benefit they are responsible for paying back the fraud debt no matter what the circumstances?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Yes.Hon Louise Upston: Has she or anyone in her office instructed officials or anyone in Work and Income to soften the Government's approach to dealing with benefit fraud?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: No.Hon Louise Upston: How many people will be investigated for benefit fraud and other dishonest entitlements in the crackdown on gangs promoted by the Minister of Police?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I don't have that information on me but what I will say is that the previous Government should have had more of a focus on the number of New Zealanders who were not getting access to what they're entitled to and then perhaps they would have more effectively addressed the issues of poverty that we face as a country.Hon Louise Upston: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It was a straight question around benefit fraud and the crackdown on gangs and the Minister didn't address the question.SPEAKER: If the member had something that had reference to gangs and crackdowns of that sort in her primary question then I think it might have been more reasonable to expect the Minister to come with the required numbers. When a member asks a very non-specific primary question she should not expect any detail in her supplementaries.Jamie Strange: Does the Minister stand by her statement we as a State have to give people what they are entitled to and so that is where our obligation lies."?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Yes I do and I'm really concerned at some of the assertions that have been made by the other side of the House with respect to concerns that we would be doing that given that we have a legal obligation as a State to give people what they are entitled to through the Ministry of Social Development (MSD). It is not just an ethical concern although we are ethical on this side of the House and want to make sure people get what they deserve to get access to. What the other side of the House fails to realise is that when you don't give people what they are entitled to through MSD then the cost is shifted to other areas like health like education and like justice. It's important that we give people what they're entitled—SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! Order! Too long.Hon Louise Upston: How many more convictions for benefit fraud is she expecting following the crackdown on gangs by the Minister of Police?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Such a deficit approach from the other side of the House—such a focus on the negative. Instead of maximising the potential of the New Zealanders that come for support through MSD they want to focus on litigation against New Zealanders. It's a hypothetical question and I'm not going to respond to it."