SpeechAGNES LOHENI (National): Thank you Madam Speaker. I'm happy to make a contribution on the second reading of this bill. Much has been made perhaps even defensively from members opposite in the House around this bill being temporary as if that's a licence that it shouldn't be applied fairly. It isn't. Being temporary is not a licence that we shouldn't be giving it due diligence and applying these measures fairly across. Job losses don't fall neatly into this eight-month time frame. There are job losses before this period there'll be job losses in waves during this period and there will be job losses after this period. So it isn't fair. I would think that for New Zealanders who have either recently lost their jobs or perhaps are in a process where they are anticipating losing their jobs or even those who are not sure how long their businesses will be able to sustain them there would be some anxiety when they look at this bill. They're sort of thinking What's going to be there for me when I might lose my job which could be outside this period?" That would cause some anxiety and it does create uncertainty when you're providing a temporary measure. But again it's in a fixed period and there's no plan of what happens afterwards because as we know job losses are going to continue in waves after this period due to COVID. I want to talk through some of the issues that have arisen as we work through this very hasty ill-thought-through and disorganised piece of legislation. I realise that that description fits every bill that's been passed under urgency these past three weeks and I want to highlight what I mean by this. Earlier today the Hon Louise Upston noted to the honourable Minister Carmel Sepuloni that the current rules would see a woman with a husband on $99000 per annum who loses her job because of COVID-19 and receives a $29000 redundancy payment be eligible for this income relief payment of $490 a week tax-free. In the meantime a woman—perhaps a sole provider for her home—who loses her job and receives a $30000 redundancy payment will not be eligible for the income relief package. Where is the fairness in how this is being applied? But it gets worse: a person who lost their job in March will be able to receive a $490 weekly payment. A person who lost their job pre-COVID will only receive $250 a week. Where is the kindness that has been applied here to these two different situations of people losing their job? This two-tier welfare system is still papering over the cracks in this Government's performance because it is two-tier. It says to people who recently lost their jobs that their loss is worse than someone who lost their job four months ago and this creates resentment. That sets Kiwis up against each other at a time that we're meant to be kind. At a time when this Government cynically says that it's the team of 5 million it turns around and says "The team of 5 million except for those of you who lost your job a few months ago. Sorry not for you." That's not kindness and that's not what this National Party stands for. So let me be clear: we do have to make provision for the wave of job losses coming through—job losses that will see New Zealanders struggle to keep their homes struggle to keep their families on track and struggle to manage the devastation that job losses cause—but this Labour Government is not making provision for supporting our fellow New Zealanders. No it's doing a job half done. New Zealanders don't want welfare; they want their jobs. This bill stops at welfare and the Prime Minister was clear she had no intention of going the extra mile to try and save those jobs. That was a burden to be carried entirely by small-business owners. Those small businesses we talk about—the local butcher the hairdresser the dressmaker—they too have to now borrow. They've been told "You've got to borrow to survive." That's not kind—that's not kind at all. I do not support this bill. DEPUTY SPEAKER: This is a split call."