Dyson Ruth: Social Security (Long-term Residential Care—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Dyson Ruth: Social Security (Long-term Residential Care—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 24 May 2012. Volume:680;Page:2514. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
: 
 You can always tell when a member does not believe a word he is saying particularly a member like Dr Paul Hutchison who is regarded by every member in this House as having integrity and being honest. He had to force every single word out of his throat and out of his mouth. It was so clear that he does not believe a word of it.  
Earlier in this debate we heard first of all from the Minister for Social Development the Hon Paula Bennett who introduced this piece of legislation the Social Security (Long-term Residential Care—Budget Measures) Bill in the most lacklustre unpassionate resentful way imaginable in the House. Then we heard from Jo Goodhew the Minister for Senior Citizens—except when she is supporting legislation like this. Then we heard from a new member Alfred Ngaro that in fact National did release a press statement announcing this legislation. So what I would like to offer again is for one of those members or any National member—frankly I do not give a toss which one it is—to table the press release. It is not on the National Party website. 
Hon Jo Goodhew 
: It is. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: It is nowhere to be found. 
Hon Jo Goodhew 
: It is. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: The Minister is bleating away “It is. It is” Well I am sorry Minister. It is not.  
Hon Jo Goodhew 
: Then you’re blind. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: No I am not blind. I am able to go through the National Party website. Other people have including members of other political parties. So I just invite the member to table it. 
Hon Jo Goodhew 
: Your colleague tried to table it before. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: I would just like to invite the member to table the press release announcing this legislation which is being put through under urgency through all stages. I want to further invite the next National speaker to explain to the 170 affected residents of residential care in New Zealand why the contract that they entered into when they entered the residential facility—which explained how much they would be entitled to keep as their assets before they were fully subsidised or partly subsidised in that residential care facility—is being broken. Why is the contract with those 170 hard-working decent honest good New Zealanders being broken because this bill is going through under urgency without giving any of those residents the opportunity to appear before a select committee and say to this House “We entered a residential facility on the clear understanding that the legislation was in place and that is how we would be affected.” but now under urgency the rules are being changed from 1 July?  
I think that every single one of those 170 residents deserves the respect of having the opportunity to appear before a select committee. In fact it would not do any harm if members of the select committee actually went to a residential care facility and listened directly to those residents. But we have not had that respect shown to any older person in New Zealand. What we have had is older New Zealanders being described as a problem being described as a burden and being described as a critical part of the financial crisis. If saving $4.5 million by taking money out of the pockets of current rest home residents is going to save New Zealand then National has quite a lot of fronting up to do about the actual financial position we are in. Taking $4.5 million from 170 residents in residential care is what this bill is going to save in the next financial year. That is out of $94 billion that the Government is going to spend. How can saving that amount of money ensure the long-term sustainability of the asset-testing regime? It is just nonsense.  
The fact that the Government is ramming this legislation through under all stages under urgency without giving one single member of the public the opportunity to have a say shows just how ashamed they are of this legislation. I bet that not one single backbench member went into their caucus briefing on the Budget on Tuesday knowing that this legislation was going to be introduced. I challenge any single National backbencher to tell this House that they knew in advance of their caucus briefing on Tuesday morning that this was what they were going to be signing up to.  
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Not one. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: Not one single member of their caucus knew in advance of the caucus briefing on Tuesday that they were going to have to put their name on the public record to this legislation being rammed through under urgency for no good reason. Not one single member of their backbench knew it. What about after the caucus briefing? I want any single National backbencher to tell this House that they knew after the caucus briefing on Tuesday that this legislation was being introduced under urgency and being taken through all stages.  
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: No not one.  
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: Not one single National member was told about this legislation in advance of its coming in. I guess what you could conclude from that is that older New Zealanders should not feel too bad after all. Yes they have had the rules around asset testing changed yes the bill is going through under urgency and they will be totally denied any opportunity to have their say about whether or not this is a good move whether it is justifiable whether it is fair but they should not feel too bad about that because not one single National backbencher knew about it either. They clearly did not have a say. No wonder Alfred Ngaro was so embarrassed about speaking on behalf of it! The member used to be highly regarded in Auckland in the social services sector but that regard is rapidly disappearing and I think quite tragically.  
I think it is an embarrassment to the process of Parliament that when we have the opportunity to say this is an issue that requires the urgent attention of the House and therefore we will extend our sitting hours and we will all stay in Wellington away from other work that we would normally do on a Friday the process is being used to cheat our older New Zealanders out of the money that just yesterday they could have looked up in the legislative framework—in the statute book—and seen what they would be entitled to. They have now had the rules totally changed. A number of those people are already in a contractual arrangement with a residential provider. They cannot change that arrangement. In just over 1 month the rules will be changed. I think that is an embarrassment. I think the process is a breach of the goodwill of Parliament. I think the Minister for Senior Citizens the Minister for Social Development and the Minister of Health should be ashamed of themselves.