SpeechHon TRACEY MARTIN (Minister for Children): Kia ora Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak on the KiwiSaver (Oranga Tamariki Guardians) Amendment Bill. If my memory serves me correctly I first heard about this bill from Michelle Boag. You might ask yourself why Michelle Boag was talking to me about what ended up being Mr Walker's member's bill. Of course Michelle Boag is the foundation partner of Boag SvG and if you don't mind my quoting they are a strategic communications consultancy specifically structured to help companies and organisations to achieve key outcomes which are vital to their business." So it's interesting in the context of this bill that they are involved. It's my understanding that Mr Stubbs from Simplicity who has been spoken about by the Opposition members today had been in conversations with Oranga Tamariki for some time around the ability to increase the number of foster children who had legal guardians who could open KiwiSaver accounts for them. The ministry quite rightly tried to work with Mr Stubbs for a period of time and to also enhance his understanding around the rights of birth parents and the complexities of foster care and the laws of guardianship. Mr Stubbs ended up not being happy with those conversations and he wanted more children to be signed into Simplicity KiwiSaver accounts. So he contracted Ms Boag to see if he could find a member of Parliament to help him get the outcome he was after and Ms Boag found Mr Walker. That's how this member's bill ended up here in Mr Walker's name. Now I've actually never been aware of that happening before but that's how this member's bill ended up here.There are a few other things that I've never seen before when it comes to a member's bill in the last nine years; some of that was around the behaviour that we have seen in this House at second reading at committee stage and even in the contribution earlier today. Getting a member's bill all the way through the House is usually a reason for celebration and I'd like to be standing here to congratulate the author of this bill on his good fortune. As Mr Ngaro just articulated it's at the mercy of the biscuit tin. So normally those members of Parliament who are lucky enough to get their bill picked from the ballot recognise how lucky they are as the odds are stacked against members with regard to getting their bill drawn out. Usually we see their behaviour and their articulations around that bill recognise that enormous privilege that enormous opportunity. Then to have their bill supported by the House in majority all the way through to its completion is normally something that a member of Parliament acknowledges their colleagues for. Having been a person who had a bill come out of the biscuit tin in Opposition who had to work across the House around ways to make it workable I know what that feels like. So that is what I had hoped to be standing here to do. But in this case we have seen something I've never seen before with a member's bill. Hamish Walker: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Two weeks ago her leader threw her under the bus twice. I'm not responsible for that—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! If the member has a genuine point of order he needs to come to it directly that does not mean making a statement like he did. Does he have a point of order? Then my ruling is it is poor form to interrupt a member who has a right to speak in this House. If the member has a point of order please do make it of course. But to interrupt a member and I'm thinking deliberately is out of order. Hamish Walker: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. We've been here for nearly four minutes. This is about the most vulnerable children in New Zealand. I don't want to play politics over children and I don't think the member's actually referred to the bill more than once. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): It's my ruling that it's the sole discretion of the Speaker to make the decision around the relevancy. My ruling is that so far the content of the member's contribution is relevant to the bill. With another six minutes to go I'm going to expect that the member will make the conclusions that she wants to make relevant to the bill. But it's my decision around that; they are debating points. Hon Mark Mitchell: Speak to the Supplementary Order Paper.Hon TRACEY MARTIN: I'm sorry I thought he was taking a point of order I do beg your pardon; just shouting from his seat. If we go back to the actual bill and the process of the bill through the House Mr Hamish Walker—and I stood up at first reading and acknowledged Mr Walker's intent. I acknowledged the work that Mr Stubbs had done previously with Oranga Tamariki and the purpose of that. I acknowledged Ms Boag's contribution and her conversation with me about attempts to actually make sure that this could be progressed. I acknowledged Mr Walker; even though he appears to continue to articulate a lack of understanding around guardianship laws in New Zealand he honestly believes that he has done the right thing. With regard to the select committee process the Social Services and Community Committee did exactly that and got the best possible outcome under current guardianship laws making sure not to disempower parents further and give Mr Walker an outcome. I believe the number is—the Hon Alfred Ngaro said it was about 500 children I think it's more likely 700 children. So that's a good thing and we should be celebrating that. However the officials that—we work in a position of power here and officials are not allowed to answer us back. Officials are not allowed to go into the public domain and defend themselves. Officials cannot do anything else but sit at the whim of the member whose bill it is behind him during a committee stage and be there at his beck and call should he need their help. Yet those officials in this instance had to sit there as they were accused of being power-grabbing heartless—didn't care about children. That's an unfortunate adjunct to a bill that should have been able to be celebrated as it went through the House. The other thing is that it is the reality of many foster children that they do not have families or parents or foster parents who are able to put in a lump sum of money to open a KiwiSaver account. I take on board the comments by Mr O'Connor that it was actually the member's own party that removed the $1000 kickstart which saw close to 200 foster children get KiwiSaver accounts—close to 200 foster children got KiwiSaver accounts while there was a $1000 kickstart that the member's own party removed. The member's own party removed it so now only those who are wealthy enough to have either parents or caregivers who can put in over a certain threshold can get a $521 top-up from a Government. So it's ironic that the member stands and articulates that nobody else and particularly that the officials—the officials who could not answer him the officials who could not defend themselves when he is in a position of power. It's ironic that that was what the member did not only at every reading since the first reading but also disgustingly at the committee of the whole House. The last thing that I want to talk about is the Supplementary Order Paper that Mr Mitchell is so keen for me to talk about. So the Rt Hon Winston Peters was on the AM Show at 6.40 a.m. in the morning on 30 July. Mr Walker's Supplementary Order Paper was dated 30 July; the Bill's Office did not open until approximately 9 a.m. on 30 July. Mr Walker stood in committee stage and articulated an interesting perspective around New Zealand First support for something that did not exist. It appears to be a theme with the Opposition at the moment to hold the Government to account for things that do not exist. We will support the bill to its conclusion. It is a shame that Mr Walker decided to take this particular attitude because not only will New Zealand First support this bill through to its application we will work with officials now to try and do better. We will work constructively and collegially without abusing people and shouting at people and belittling them when they have no power to respond. We will work constructively. We will finally do for the children of New Zealand what that party took away. We will finally do for the children of New Zealand what that member says that he wishes to while at the same time fulfilling the very things that the Francis review was asked to make sure that we didn't have happen."