Newman Muriel: Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Newman Muriel: Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17288] 
Dr MURIEL NEWMAN (Deputy Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I would like to take a call on Part 2 of this Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill and I would like to refer to the promise that the Labour Party made in its 1999 election brochure that it was all about people not money. That was the election brochure where Helen Clark’s photo was airbrushed; members will remember the lovely airbrushed photograph. Anyway the brochure stated: “Labour will abolish its asset testing. We say asset testing older people is wrong. It will go.” Now if members refer to schedule 1 of the bill which contains the new schedule 27—which clause 5 of the bill proposes to substitute for the current twenty-seventh schedule of the Social Security Act—they will see a table that shows asset testing being abolished but does it happen next year? No. Does it happen the year after? No. Does it happen the year after that? No. It happens in the year 2026. That is when the asset-testing regime will go. So can the people of New Zealand rely on Labour Party promises? The answer is no absolutely not. 
While we are talking about promises—because this bill is meant to be the delivery of an election promise—I remind members what Helen Clark our current Prime Minister said in this brochure: “Under my leadership a Labour-led Government will deliver public health services we can all be proud of. We are going to put the heart back into the health system.” What do we think the more than 3000 New Zealanders who died on the waiting list think about that? Will they believe— 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Not much I don’t think. 
Dr MURIEL NEWMAN 
: No I do not think they can think of much because they are not actually here! The Labour Party Government’s health system failed those New Zealanders. What about the hundreds of thousands of people waiting on the waiting list? 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: 173000. 
Dr MURIEL NEWMAN 
: There are 173000 people waiting on the waiting list for health services. What will they say? They will say that Labour’s delivery of health services to New Zealanders is an absolute disgrace. 
We have another failed Labour Party promise in this bill before us now. Labour said it would be used to abolish asset testing. I say that this type of bill from Labour is wrong. In this case it is intergenerational theft. It is asking future generations of New Zealanders—our children of today—to pay huge amounts of money for an asset-testing regime that this country does not need. What it needs is an ability for older New Zealanders to retire with money in the bank. To enable New Zealanders to afford to save a decent amount for their retirement this Government should be introducing tax cuts. If we had tax cuts then this sort of bill would not be needed. Tax cuts is an idea whose time has certainly come. We have the Progressive Party the Government’s own coalition partner agreeing that taxes are too high in New Zealand. We need tax cuts to allow New Zealanders to retire with money in the bank; then this sort of poorly designed legislation would not be needed. That is why the ACT party is opposing this bill. 
A point that submitters made one after another was that this type of residential care for the elderly this type of business is increasingly difficult to provide not because of a whole bunch of other stuff but because of the Labour Government increasing the regulations on their sector and in particular increasing the cost of wages and salaries and industrial relations concerns. The Government has regulated the labour market so much that organisations like The Salvation Army find that they no longer have the money to be able to keep their care facilities ticking over. The costs have now gone beyond the pale and they have had to close their doors.