Ross Jami-LeeInstruction to CommitteeJAMI-LEE ROSS (Senior Whip—National): I move That it be an instruction to the committee of the whole House on the Families Package (Income Tax and Benefits) Bill that it have the power to consider and if it thinks fit to adopt amendments that are not within scope of the bill but are broadly related to family incomes reducing child poverty and the well-being of families.I move this instruction to the committee which the House will note is a debatable instruction because we are debating today and will be debating in the committee of the whole House very shortly a bill that seeks to do some honourable things. It seeks to look at issues to do with targeted social assistance improving incomes for low and middle income families with children and reducing child poverty. There will be amendments that are moved by this side of the House that will be in the scope of the bill but this side of the House is of the view that we should be discussing things somewhat broader than that.So this instruction that I have moved today—after looking at a few Hansards from an honourable gentleman who's done this a few times in the past seeking some inspiration in fact we're of the view that we should broaden the scope of what the committee can consider we should extend the powers of the committee of the whole House and as you would know sir the way to do that is to move—[Interruption]—well maybe one day. As you would know Mr Speaker the way to do that is to move an instruction to the committee of the whole House so I do that.I've moved this instruction and should it be accepted by the House the instruction would allow the committee to consider in a broader fashion matters that are important to the Parliament and important to members of this House. I'm of the view that the wider issues around family incomes the wider issues around reducing child poverty and the wider issues around the well-being of families should be considered as part of the committee's consideration of this bill. There are matters that we want to raise and we want to debate and that we want to have considered by way of amendments that we will be placing on the Table if we get the opportunity after this instruction has passed by the House. We'd like those to be debated and some of those issues will be out of the scope of the bill but they should be debated. So we want to broaden those powers that the committee has.We have been doing some research. We've got former Ministers of Finance and former Associate Ministers of Finance who have been beavering away upstairs on matters that we could put up to improve this bill. They've been beavering hard—Mr Joyce—but we want to go broader than what the current Standing Orders would allow and we have come up with a range of issues. I mean we are aware that the Labour Party for example has a strong view on setting measures for child poverty. If the committee was given more power to consider this bill then we should be considering broader matters around measures on child poverty. It's not necessarily something that we would support if it's in the form that the Labour Party might have put up but we think we should be having that debate. We think the committee should have the power to consider amendments along those lines and whether they come from this side or that side it's completely up to members.There are issues to do with food in schools for example. We know there's a political debate right now around funding for a charity. It would impact on food provided in schools and so as an issue that broadly is in line with issues to do with the well-being of families we should have the power to be able to debate that by way of a Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) and by way of an amendment if we wish to. Giving the committee the power to do that would be important.This side of the House has some strong views on early childhood education and some strong views on how that impacts on the well-being of families. Also we know that the cost of early childhood education is an issue that can contribute towards reducing child poverty in this country. If the committee had the power to consider SOPs and amendments along those lines those are the types of issues that we'd like to see discussed.We are also aware that school fees and the cost of school uniforms are issues that are important to families. Those go to the heart of many family budgets and the way in which parents can afford to provide things for their children to enable them to attend school. We're of the view that that should be an issue that should be debated through the committee stage on this particular bill. So giving the committee power to consider those issues giving the committee broader power than what currently is allowed for under the Standing Orders is very important.There are also other issues that our members have put up by way of members' bills—members' bills about issues that we think should be debated by the Parliament. If we give the committee of the whole House power to consider those issues by way of an amendment here that would give us the ability to put forward for the Government's consideration important issues to do with families. I mean I know that Dr Parmjeet Parmar who may be in this House right now has a newborn child bill which is of importance to many people and it is something she believes passionately in. Should the committee be given the power to consider that very issue then we would want to put that forward as an amendment that we might want to consider.There are other issues that have come forward. I know that there are some issues to do with dental costs which is an issue that's important for many members on our side of the House. We believe that goes to the fundamental question of well-being for families. It's a matter to do with reducing child poverty if it can assist those children longer term and in the future as well. We believe that compulsory GP registration is something that should be considered. Income splitting was something that Peter Dunne—let's just consider Peter Dunne for a moment. He was someone who was in favour of income splitting. I'm not sure it's something we would want to pick up but they might. They might want to pick it up. Training allowances—all of these types of matters are costs to families. All of these types of matters impact on the income that's available as disposable income for families and all of these matters we think the committee of the whole House should have the power to consider.So I appeal to the other side. The other side of this House has put forward a bill that in their view has some honourable intent. They've put forward the view because they believe that there are some issues this House should be debating under urgency. They believe they're urgent matters to do with family incomes urgent matters to do with the well-being of families and we are saying Yes if the committee is going to debate that then we should be considering it in a broader sense." Having a broader debate in the Parliament in the committee of the whole House just before Christmas so we can put on the table all of the views that parties in this Parliament have around families around incomes around the well-being of families—we should be doing that. We should be signalling to New Zealand and we can do that by way of the committee of the whole House if we give the committee wider power to do that.So I know there are other members behind me who have issues they wish to raise. I know there are other members who feel strongly about giving the committee broader powers to do this and so I'm going to—Mr SPEAKER: The member's going to sit down. All I'm going to do is ask the member to stop being repetitious. He's now gone on a bit of a track that is repetitious. This is a very very tight debate and repetition is not allowed.JAMI-LEE ROSS: Well I think I've made myself clear.Mr SPEAKER: I think several times.JAMI-LEE ROSS: There are other issues that this side of the House may wish to debate on this very motion so I'll allow my members to do that now."