Lewis StephSTEPH LEWIS (Labour—Whanganui): Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise tonight to take the last call on the second reading of the New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income (Fair Residency) Amendment Bill. I'd like to begin by acknowledging the former member Mark Patterson who drafted this bill and Andrew Bayly for picking this bill up and bringing it through the House. I'd also like to acknowledge the work that the Finance and Expenditure Committee has done on this bill because although I don't sit on that committee I understand that when this bill was introduced it was more of a vibe as opposed to something concrete and understandable. So I think the bill that we are now debating tonight before us has come a long way and it strikes a balance that ensures that we're looking after people in a fair and reasonable way. I also want to acknowledge Minister Carmel Sepuloni and her officials because again their input speaks volumes in the bill that we have before us tonight. My final thankyou is to the more than 300 people who took the time to submit on this bill to share their stories to provide advice and information to the committee. As we heard from my colleague Barbara Edmonds this bill is an example of how individuals and groups and communities can have input into this process and see meaningful results come from that. So this bill proposes to raise the minimum residency qualification for New Zealand superannuation from 10 years to 20 years. It would ensure that a resident has lived in New Zealand for a substantial part of their adult life which means that they will have also contributed through taxes to our economy for a substantial part of their adult lives here. Here in Aotearoa we have by international standards a fairly generous pension scheme. It's not means-tested and it's universal. However when you look across the globe at other comparable schemes residing in a country for 10 years is an unusually short period of time to then become eligible for a full entitlement to a universal superannuation scheme at the age of 65. On average we are seeing life expectancies lengthen so it is possible that there are instances where an individual will be receiving their pension entitlement for longer than the period that they contributed to it for and this creates an anomaly. It raises legitimate questions about the fairness of the current settings in the superannuation Act. This proposed bill would contribute to the sustainability of New Zealand's superannuation and it would address some of those fairness issues that I have raised.I'd also like to note at this point that there are a significant number of New Zealanders who work in highly stressful or highly physical jobs who have lower than average life expectancies. I've seen that firsthand in the prison service where a number of corrections officers who my dad worked with who I knew growing up through my childhood passed away before they reached the age of retirement before they were old enough to collect their first pension payment yet most if not all of them had contributed to the superannuation scheme for the vast majority of their working lives. My dad was 54 when he died after working in the prison service for over 30 years and prior to that he worked in the forestry service. So for close to 40 years he paid his taxes; he contributed to our economy to our communities and to the superannuation scheme; yet he did not receive any benefits from it. Like I said he and a number of his colleagues didn't get to reap the benefits of this system that they spent years contributing to. So the suggestion from across the House that we heard earlier tonight that the solution to the affordability of our superannuation system is to raise the age of eligibility does not sit well with me. That is why I say that there is a fairness issue here and I am glad that we have the opportunity to debate this in the House tonight. How is it fair when someone has spent their full entire working lives contributing to a system that they don't get to reap the benefits from yet someone living here for 10 years could receive the full entitlement for longer than they spent contributing to that system? It's also been noted by my colleagues and I want to remind those listening at home too that the reason we're having discussions about the affordability of our superannuation scheme is because the previous National Government chose to stop contributions to the super scheme. That means that the cost of that decision again falls to my generation to wear the burden of it. I want to commend several of the recommendations that have come from the select committee. The first is for suggesting a change which acknowledges the special relationship that New Zealand has with the Realm countries: the Cook Islands Tokelau and Niue. I think it's really important that we acknowledge that relationship. The second change I want to acknowledge is the changes that were proposed around refugees and protected persons. I support this recommendation because it recognises that refugees have no say in where they go or when they go. I can't begin to imagine what it would be like to be forced from your home from your job from your life as you knew it to flee in fear of your life so I commend this change. The third change I want to acknowledge tonight is the change to implement this in a graduated way over a number of years. I think this is an important change when you consider the original version of this bill pre - select committee didn't protect the current or existing entitlements and it didn't have any lead-in time proposed whatsoever. So the fact that this will now be transitioned in over a number of years is excellent. It gives people transparency and the ability to plan ahead.Finally I want to finish by acknowledging the contributions that our migrant communities make to Aotearoa every day. We have many wonderful and diverse cultures including in my own electorate. They've come to New Zealand and they've shared their culture with us their customs their food their dress their music and even their language. I would like put on record that I am grateful for their contributions. I am grateful to the vibrancy that they bring our communities. But this bill is about fairness it's about securing the future of New Zealand superannuation and as somebody who is still more than 30 years away from reaching the current age of eligibility I commend this bill to the House.