Luxon ChristopherCHRISTOPHER LUXON (National—Botany): It's a real pleasure to take a short call in support of the Social Security (Financial Assistance for Caregivers) Amendment Bill. As we've canvassed in this House obviously the bill does some very good things in terms of removing the 12-month rule and obviously extending the Christmas and birthday allowances to caregivers who are receiving those benefits to match the foster care system. As I prepared you know looked through the notes it was quite obvious that actually the payment system as a whole has never really been fundamentally reviewed and it's really important work that we're doing getting started with that because clearly it hasn't kept pace with societal change over the years.National is really pleased to support this bill. We think it's very fair very common-sense and a great improvement that's going to be a really good thing for vulnerable children. I just want to commend Minister Davis and also Tracey Martin for doing the work in bringing this to the House today. It's really good to be in the House where we've got cross-party support for something so important as our children.There are 20000 children that are being cared for by over 15000 caregivers and for a number of different reasons whose parents can't care for them themselves. So we know that many children who have unstable home lives who lack regular contact with their parents are just on a setback and are really facing some big challenges financially and socially. We just do acknowledge the huge selflessness the sacrifice of those caregivers who step into that role and really step up. I just want to commend also—I was listening to Glen Bennett speak earlier in the House and just thank you for the role that you've done as a caregiver as well and in particular recognise that many of the people and many of the caregivers a significant proportion of them are also Māori women and that's a really awesome thing that we're doing here.So if it wasn't for these caregivers we really know that these children would face greater upheaval. They would have greater uncertainty and they would be living much more challenging lives. It is interesting as you take a step back and reflect on it that two five-year-olds in this country actually start in very different places and don't have an equality of opportunity. I think it is right that we as the State make powerful interventions in those lives to change the trajectory of where they're going. I remember hearing Bill English speak about the fact that there were 1500 five-year-olds in State care in any given year and over the course of them coming up through the age of 35 we'd spend $550 million in support of those children. That's a phenomenal amount of money but it just underscores the need to make powerful interventions early to change the trajectory and the course of where those lives are going.We know that the chances of going to jail we know the chances of not completing NCEA level 2 we know the chances of going on to a benefit are much higher as a result of that start in life. So anything we can do fundamentally to make a powerful intervention to be able to get the right outcomes and the right trajectory is really important. In doing so it's actually good economics because we end up saving that $550 million in that case but the principle is very much the same. So spending money now to secure long-term results and really good outcomes for our most vulnerable and the people living the most messy and challenged and complex lives is a very good thing while also giving the Government lower costs for the future.We also know when you think about children who are in foster care they grow up to have half the adult income of those that weren't raised in foster care and so again it just underscores the importance of making those interventions. And as we have talked about on this side of the House and I know on the other side as well those first thousand days are just so critical to getting those children off to such a good start in life.So in terms of the current reality—the situation where these caregivers take on children in short-term situations and then have not been able to access the assistance and support that they are owed and that they deserve despite taking on those day-to-day responsibilities—this is a very good thing. We know that living costs are really high and it's a very expensive undertaking and so anything we can do to offset those significant costs I think is very important.Finally I just think rectifying the disparity between caregivers in State care and those outside the system is a very very good thing. So the bill's a small step in the right direction and it rightly recognises caregivers who are accessing the orphans benefit and the unsupported children's benefits. I'm very pleased to support this bill and commend it to the House.