Warren-Clark AngieANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. It is actually a real pleasure to stand and speak on this bill. I want to acknowledge and congratulate Carmel Sepuloni for bringing this bill to the House. It is one of the Welfare Expert Advisory Group report recommendations and it's something that my party has very very clearly said in our manifesto that we will do. I am very proud that we are doing this tonight. We have heard from the Hon Louise Upston the previous speaker that the removal of the subsequent child policy will force children into poverty and take away the aspirations of families. Well hang on a minute what does this bill actually do as opposed to the dramatics that we heard across the floor? This bill is not about taking the aspirations of families away. This bill is recognising that if a subsequent child is born at year one once that child hits the age of one then mum—we'll say mum" in this instance because it generally is mum—is required to ignore the fact that they have had that child and to have full work-ready requirements. Irrespective of what happens in that household irrespective of how many other children there are irrespective of the circumstances of that particular family the subsequent child policy says very clearly "You have to go out to work." Now I have been a single mother as has the Hon Louise Upston. Both of us I believe only had the one child and we know how hard it is to be single mums. I was on the DPB and then a working mum. Now my aspirations never disappeared ever and the aspirations of people never disappear just simply because there is a punitive process in place. It just doesn't work. The Opposition tell us that they care so much about the first 1000 days of a child's life. They tell us this constantly and they constantly say to us that the first 1000 days—which is the first 24 months—is so very important. Well whose children are they talking about when they talk about the first thousand days? We want all our children to have the choices and we want the parents to have the choices. If it is best to stay at home and look after your baby and you're a single mum then that is what you will be able to do under this piece of legislation. Why is that important? It's because our children deserve the best and what's best for our children is not the State saying "Get off your butt and get out to work regardless of whether you can afford child support childcare or any of those things."; it's actually about whether you as a parent can manage to work when you have another child. That is it quite simply. What we know is that the first thousand days are very important. This removal aligns that child policy really well so that we enable families. If they want and if they're able and if they're able to manage it they can go out to work. They do not have a punitive response at that point. They do not have difficulties with achieving and keeping a benefit. Let's just talk about what actually happens at the moment—how the law actually works. I'm just going to step through a scenario. Mum has one child and receives a sole parent benefit currently. Mum has the following work obligations currently at this point. She has the work preparation obligations of the first child if the child is under three she is at home is caring but is doing work prep—OK? So that's the first step. The second step: part-time work obligations if the child is aged three and above to 14 years and then after 14 years full-time work obligations if the child is 14 years or over—OK? So that's what's in place at the moment. Now if mum has a second child—or a subsequent child as we call it—once that child turns one then they have to go to step three: full-time work obligations. That's how it works and that does not take into account anything to do with the family circumstances or what's best for the children or for the children of that family so you might as well say that the second child doesn't count as a child for the purposes. We're not removing the aspirations of these women and these parents—we're not doing that. We're not taking anything away. We're actually enabling people to make choices for themselves and to support their families. They have the option—the option—to go to work if that suits their family circumstances and believe you me that will suit many women's circumstances but some it will not. Removing something that is standardised is the best way forward. This bill has two parts to it and they're coming in on two different dates: 8 November and 11 October 2021. So we've got two parts. We're going to be in a hurry to get this legislation managed and through the House to ensure that this is in place to support our families and it's really important we do this because the transition period—sorry I'm getting a little bit ahead of myself; spitting a little bit I think sorry. It's really important we do this so that the transition period—sorry—Hon Member: Say it; don't spray it. ANGIE WARREN-CLARK: I won't spray it. The transition period very clearly enables our families to know where they sit. If we don't run the transition processes through what will happen is that people will get notice upon notice upon notice from Work and Income and the difficulty with that really means that families won't know where they stand exactly. So the transition period comes in on 11 October and that will support our families to understand where their obligations are. This is a rather small piece of legislation in terms of what it actually purports to do—or rather the bill is rather small. But the changes that it brings in place are really about supporting and valuing our families as parents and it also supports us meeting some of the needs of our most vulnerable families. I guess if you could imagine the situation where you are on a sole parent benefit you're not necessarily having the support of a wider family or whānau you're not necessarily having a good social structure around you and then you have a second child—and don't even get me started on contraception in this country and the rights of our mums to carry children or not—and somehow you are punished for that. You're not supposed to be able to have another child while you are a beneficiary apparently and you're required to go out to work after one year. That to me smacks of beneficiary bashing and I will say that—I will say that. It does not enable anyone to do better by forcing a person to go out and do that work particularly if you are a single parent you are on a sole benefit and you are lacking in resources. One of the things that I'm delighted about is that we are removing the subsequent child proportion but the other part that we are doing is putting in place the training incentive allowance again to support mammas into work. Thank you."