Upston LouiseHon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō): I would like to take the opportunity to speak on a tabled amendment in my name that hasn't been discussed in this debate. As I said before because this is being debated in urgency for something that doesn't come into effect until July it is important that there is the opportunity to fully debate amendments in this House and that the Minister in the chair will answer any questions related to these amendments.The amendment that I'm referring to is one of equity. This is of the fact that a dependent child who has been adopted wouldn't actually get the Best Start tax credit. The members opposite when they were in Opposition talked a lot about equity so I want to know from the Minister in the chair why it is that a child that's been adopted—whether at three months six months or 2½ years—is not eligible to be supported by taxpayers across New Zealand.Hon Tracey Martin: They are—through the orphans and unsupported child's benefit.Hon LOUISE UPSTON: It is a really important question that I would like answered. This is a child that's been adopted—a child that's been adopted. Their parents are valid parents like any other parent in New Zealand and I'm really hoping that the Minister for Children isn't suggesting that a child that's been adopted in this country has any less rights and support than any other child in New Zealand. If the Minister is suggesting that I think the House should be deeply deeply concerned. That means we should have a greater opportunity to debate this amendment given there's no other opportunity for the public of New Zealand to have their say—and I know that families who've been involved in adoption would have a lot to say about my amendment. I do ask for the Minister of Finance to consider it because it is a matter of equity.The current Government is you know clearly committed to the best interests of children which is what our Government was—and 50000 children would have been lifted out of poverty. Steven Joyce has raised some issues around actually the numbers being very confused in the regulatory impact statement in terms of whether it's an extra 12 which would get us to 62 when actually the number of 88 is referred to but I'll let some of my colleagues pick that point up.The point I want to come back to is around equity. I raised in one of my earlier comments the equity around someone who's working and therefore getting paid parental leave but this is the fact that an adopted child isn't getting the same amount of support from taxpayers.I want to refer to the contribution that the Hon Iain Lees-Galloway made although his tone was incredibly dismissive in terms of the importance of a debate under urgency—I think people listening would have been quite shocked at that. The comment was around trust and around who they trust. Clearly that side of the House doesn't trust taxpayers because if they trusted taxpayers then they would accept the amendment that's been put forward by the Hon Steven Joyce around lifting Working for Families payments because that would enable families and taxpayers to make those decisions themselves.Anyway dealing with the bill as that side of the House has drafted it my request and my question to the Minister is around equity because—and I'll use the Rt Hon Bill English as an example—the equity is that a member of Parliament and their family on their income would get the full entitlement to the Best Start payment in the first 12 months of their baby's life yet a low-income family who is currently accessing paid parental leave won't. I want the Minister in the chair to explain to me how that provides equity. How is that fair? How is that fair when we talk about something that is universal and we talk about equity—there's another example—and there's no equity for the child of an adopting set of parents? My question to the Minister in the chair—Hon Ruth Dyson: We've done this.Hon LOUISE UPSTON: —is about equity. Madam Chair Williams I'm a bit bothered that members of the Government are interjecting about an amendment that I am speaking to for the very very first time. It bothers me that they are not—[Time expired]