Collins Judith: Social Security Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Collins Judith: Social Security Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:639;Page:9241] 
JUDITH COLLINS (National—Clevedon) 
: 
 In speaking on Part 2 I will try to find something nice to say and I think I have found it. What I can say is that National is very pleased that there will now be a section 33A to enable a person in receipt of an invalids benefit granted on the grounds of his or her sickness injury disability or total blindness to be absent from New Zealand in order to receive vocational training or disability assistance training if the chief executive is satisfied that the training is particularly good for the person. We think that that is a reasonable provision and something that actually looks at the fact that sometimes people will need to travel overseas and it would be extraordinarily counterproductive for people to suddenly not be entitled to receive their benefit because they are overseas for a short period of time in order to increase their ability to find work when they come back to New Zealand. We think that is a good move. 
One of the things we do not like about Part 2 is the provision in relation particularly to clause 30. It follows on from clause 29 which is all about personal development and employment plans. We heard quite a bit about personal development and employment plans in the submissions to the select committee. One of the things we heard which deeply disturbed many of us was that a recent study for the Families Commission—presumably paid for by the commission which certainly contracted for the study and apparently peer reviewed it—by the Rotorua Peoples Advocacy Centre found that personal development and employment plans were all very well and good except that most of the people whom the centre came across had never actually received a copy of their plan. According to the submitter from the Rotorua Peoples Advocacy Centre when the Work and Income person was asked why beneficiaries do not get a copy of their plan the answer was: “Because nobody expects them to do anything with it.”—or words to that effect. We thought that was quite disturbing. 
One of the things I see in the bill is that there are significant sanctions in relation to some of these personal development plans. But I do not think I can see anywhere here a requirement that the beneficiary be given a copy of his or her plan. I would have thought that that was a pretty basic requirement for a plan that is supposed to be an annual plan a plan that should be able to be looked at and worked on but also a plan that has some sanctions with it. 
Perhaps I am missing the point here in terms of the actual section where it should state that but I do not see any obligation in the bill. I am particularly concerned when there are going to be sanctions relating to these plans that they be treated seriously. There is an ability here for instance for the chief executive—in other words the person working at Work and Income—to decide that the beneficiary has not demonstrated commitment to the goals in his or her plan. I am just a little bit concerned about that because I think that that quite blanket discretion gives a huge amount of power to a Work and Income staff member. That power might be well exercised—in most cases no doubt it will be—but there does not seem to be much in the way of ability for the beneficiary to actually say: “Well look I have been doing my very best according to this plan but I am going to be sanctioned because I am being told that I am not doing my best.” We think that that is something that should be looked at. 
In particular I note the quite interesting new amendment that the Government wanted in clause 30(3A) which inserts section 60S(5A) relating to the chief executive not being able to take into account a refusal or failure to undertake activity in the community. What we are saying to beneficiaries with this bill is that they have to undertake all sorts of plans and training—everything except work experience. So the one thing that is most likely to be able to get them into a work situation where they can start working alongside other people in order to get the idea of what to do and to get their confidence going is not going to be part of the plan—certainly not part of the sanction parts of the plan. What is really the point of these sanctions when we are actually saying to beneficiaries: “Well you don’t have to do the work experience bit. You don’t actually have to get out there and do anything. You just have to go to endless seminars.”?