Bond Ria: Social Security (Commencement of Benefits) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBond Ria: Social Security (Commencement of Benefits) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 November 2015. Volume:710;Page:8243. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]RIA BOND (NZ First): I am pleased to rise on behalf of New Zealand First and take this call on the third reading of the Social Security (Commencement of Benefits) Amendment Bill. New Zealand First supports this bill and I will endeavour to outline why. My colleague’s contribution earlier in the first and second reading and throughout the Committee stage of this simple bill is quite correct. This bill is merely seeking to amend a technical glitch and put in place a simple fair and clear process to fix this glitch.New Zealand First has an amendment that basically asks the Government to automatically include those beneficiaries who clearly can be easily identified by the records of Work and Income New Zealand and will qualify for a payment under this bill we are debating tonight.The purpose of this bill is relatively straightforward as set out in the general policy statement which is outlined in the departmental disclosure statement. The general policy statement reads: “This Bill amends the Social Security Act 1964 to correct with retrospective effect to 3 June 1998 an error in the legislation that does not give effect to the policy intent that a benefit commences on the day after a stand down period ends as opposed to the day on which the stand down period ends. It also provides that certain people are protected from the effect of the retrospective amendment including those who apply for a review of a decision of their commencement date before or in the case of benefit that commenced on or after 20 May 2014 within 6 weeks after the Bill comes into force.”I have gone over this bill to get a clear understanding of the impact of the technical glitch this Government finds itself dealing with tonight. I noted the departmental disclosure statement asks valid key questions especially in “Part Four: Significant Legislative Features”. Point 4.3 asks: “Does this Bill affect rights freedoms or impose obligations retrospectively?”. Clearly the answer is yes it does. Point 4.3 goes on: “Provisions in the Bill have [a] retrospective effect which could be seen as contentious as generally legislation should operate prospectively [and] not retrospectively. However in this case the retrospective provisions can be justified to ensure: [that] the Government policy intent is upheld [that] practice and understanding that has been previously applied by the Ministry of Social Development is validated [and that] financial costs to the Crown that were not anticipated are avoided. The amendment to section 80BA”—of the Social Security Act—“to correct the commencement date of a benefit so that a benefit commences on the day after a stand down period ends will be retrospective to 3 June 1998 in order to validate the Ministry of Social Development’s previous practice and decisions.”It is the general understanding of New Zealanders that the Government has the legal and moral duty to pay beneficiaries what it says they are entitled to. Once this assessment is processed at Work and Income people go into a stand-down period. Therein lies the problem: the stand-down period itself. From listening to previous members speaking it seems to be the sinking ship. Clearly members do not agree with this mandatory stand-down period which in many cases can sadly force people into the early stages of poverty.This is one of the consequences and barriers that people in New Zealand face when they are standing in line to ask for assistance to keep a roof over their heads meals on their tables and shoes on their feet. I am referring to casual workers teacher-aides seasonal workers freezing workers people who have been made redundant or people whose current job and current employer are just not a good fit. They go into Work and Income New Zealand to apply for a benefit and get hit with that mandatory stand-down period and they hope like hell that the last 50 60 or even 100 bucks will see them through the stand-down time.I find it amazing that legislative muck-ups have occurred over many years under both National and Labour Governments such as this bill we are debating tonight under urgency. To recap for those viewers watching the Social Security Amendment Act (No 2) in 1998 amended section 80BA of the Social Security Act and it incorrectly changed the wording to mean the day the stand-down ends. The wording change was not picked up until it was identified in a Social Security Appeal Authority’s decision in May 2014—and thank goodness too. Now 18 months later here we are under urgency debating this amendment and fixing a retrospective law to simply close this loophole up for good.The legislative error was unfortunate and operational practice was changed from 29 September 2015 so that payments were technically in line with the wording of the law until legislative change is passed. This will now add clarity to Work and Income stand-down periods. I understand that it has always been Government policy that a benefit will commence the day after a stand-down period ends. For example that means if you have a stand-down period of 5 days then your benefit will kick in on the sixth day. This I know—I am not doubting it—was how this legislation was intended to work and of course the operational practices of Work and Income support should match up.The Social Security (Commencement of Benefits) Amendment Bill corrects the error with full retrospective effect to 3 June 1998. This New Zealand First believes addresses the unintended consequences to beneficiaries and the cost to taxpayers. It means that any beneficiary who has lodged a review of a decision related to a benefit commencement on or after the 1998 amendment and before the passing of corrective legislation will still have their review process in the usual way.Just quickly before I finish I do empathise with beneficiaries because no matter which way this bill that is being debated under urgency tonight is covered or how members in this House choose to debate this bill comments on social media sites are already slamming them for expecting to benefit from the Government’s “honest mistake”. This has been an embarrassing oversight and I am sure a regrettable moment on both the National Government’s and Labour Government’s books. New Zealand First supports this bill.