Logie Jan: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLogie Jan: Budget Measures (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 15 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17987. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAN LOGIE (Green): I rise to speak to the Budget Measure (Financial Support for Newborn Children) Bill again and follow on from some of our discussion last night. First I do need to note how disappointed I was last night to see the proposal to extend paid parental leave to 26 weeks voted down. It was I think a real shame for all the families in New Zealand who have access to paid parental leave. So to talk specifically to Part 2 of this bill the Green Party really supports the vision of having every single child thriving in this country and we believe in making an investment in our children and our families. We believe that that investment would pay off manyfold for many years for this country. We along with many in this country are deeply concerned about the levels of inequality that we are now living with in New Zealand. Those 285000 children could be living in poverty—Hon Anne Tolley: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I know that we have had a wide-ranging debate but I do think that we are on Part 2 and this speaker should really attempt to talk to the bill.Hon Trevor Mallard: I actually listened to the last sentence that the member spoke before she was so rudely interrupted and it was directly on this part of the bill. If the Deputy Leader of the House listened to the debate—The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy): Order! The member should not use a point of order to attack another member. I think the point is well made. I have been listening very carefully and we are on the amendments to the Income Tax Act—that is Part 2. Some discretion is given to draw an analogy and example. I have listened very carefully. I am kind of reluctant to interrupt members but if members do not want to debate Part 2 then that is inviting the Committee to determine whether or not it wants a closure. That is the kind of discipline around how this stuff works all right?JAN LOGIE: Actually to carry on exactly from what I was saying about our concern around the levels of inequality in this country the parental tax credit which we are debating in Part 2 of this bill will directly feed into that inequality in this country which for us is just a shame. It is symbolic of the ideology of this Government whereby it will offer token lollies to people. That will make a difference to some families and I am not underestimating that. Seventy dollars a week for middle-income families in this country will make a difference and that is why we are supporting this provision. However by purposefully denying this parental tax credit to beneficiaries to people receiving ACC and to those receiving student allowances or pensions it will actually also increase inequality. The group that is in the most need is getting nothing from this provision in the bill which is why we are putting forward an amendment to this bill which I hope others in this Parliament will support to ensure that this extension to the parental tax credit will be available to every single family in New Zealand because we care deeply about inequality.I would also like to note that in some of the discussions around this provision in Part 2 of the bill the Child Poverty Action Group’s analysis of this issue has noted that the Government appears to have a blind spot when it comes to the needs of children and beneficiary families and we agree with that. We have heard that quite clearly from some of the interjections from the Government side of the Chamber last night and again today. I do want to remind this Committee of some of the drivers in the need for people to require income support. The primary driver for it is either a loss of employment which is something people have no control over or it may be disability and we have not brought down the barriers to employment for people with disabilities or it can be domestic violence which is something that we are supposedly all together on in this Parliament in fighting. So to discriminate against those families and to deny them this extra money to be able to help cope in those early days after the birth of a child does not seem consistent to us with the values of an inclusive society.I would also note that the Child Poverty Action Group has looked at this analysis and it has also said that although it looks as though families are going to be getting extra money and it will increase on annual terms for those families who are able to get it so that they will now get basically about $2200 from this provision up from $1200—so it is an extra $1000 in total for those families to cope with those extra financial costs of a new baby—it is urging the Government as are we to extend those payments to families who are currently excluded. In the words of Susan St John it is unfair that the new mothers and their newborns who are most in need will get no help from these measures which are funded by the taxpayer.For me that is one of the things to remember. Our tax money is our collective expression of our values as a country. Together we have so much more resource and we can make a huge difference in the lives of these families at virtually no individual cost to us actually. When it all comes together it is a tiny amount from me and a tiny amount from you that will make such a huge difference. I really believe that New Zealanders do want children and babies in beneficiary families—those who are leaving violent relationships those with disabilities those who have lost their jobs—to have as good a start as anyone else. That is what is in front of this Committee today: the opportunity either to give kids the best chance in every family or to entrench inequality. I am really hoping that this Committee will reflect on its values reflect on the foundations of this country and come up with a solution that says “Yes we believe every child deserves to thrive and no we do not support entrenching and building inequality in this country.”I would also like to just note that this provision of the bill has been specifically noted by the Government as part of its families package of $500 million which sounds like quite a lot and is a significant investment. But it is worth noting for the country that this is over 4 years so that is actually only $125 million a year and this provision is actually an increase of only $15 million a year I have been told. So when we are thinking about the relative value—Hon Trevor Mallard: 13.JAN LOGIE: —$13 million; thank you Mr Mallard—and how much this Government is really valuing families and children and wanting to support them I also remind them that $1 billion is now being spent on servicing the interest on the debt that this Government got us into because it chose to cut taxes for the wealthiest in this country. To me that needs to be said. I want to support and give affirmation to the Government for good initiatives and we will do that at every opportunity but this does need to be put in context. The question needs to be asked as to whether this fundamentally reflects our values. Will this deliver on a country where every single child has the ability to thrive? We are giving all our weight to that vision.Sadly although we will be supporting this because it is something unless this Committee extends it to every single family and particularly to beneficiary families I do not believe that this initiative will deliver what our children deserve.