Muller Todd: Social Security Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMuller Todd: Social Security Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading[Sitting date: 17 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1632. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty): It is an absolute privilege for me to stand up here and give what is essentially my first speech if you exclude the 90 seconds that I was allotted for the Social Assistance (Portability to Cook Islands Niue and Tokelau) Bill which is of course a very important bill that is in front of the Social Services Committee. I very much look forward to having the report back of that after we listen to the submitters in the next couple of weeks. So with the exception of those 90 seconds and my maiden speech this is the very first time that I have had the opportunity to get up and say a few words to the House in respect of this particular bill—and in fact on any particular bill.Firstly can I wish you all a very good New Year. I know that for some of you particularly across the other side of the House you are probably looking forward to Christmas already. But look it was a fantastic break. Certainly it was for me and I hope it was for you Mr Assistant Speaker Tisch. I understand that you occasionally holiday in the beautiful Bay of Plenty. You have been known to do so over the last 65 years and I hope that your last holiday was very enjoyable.On a more sombre note however I do want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the passing of a couple of very special New Zealanders—if I could start particularly with Dr Api Mahuika. I appreciate that there were many in this House probably more qualified than me to talk last week to his contribution to New Zealand and Ngati Porou but I would like to add my small voice to that acclaim. I had the privilege over the last 6 years to be sitting on the Waikato University council with Api. He was an extraordinary person to sit alongside in a governance context. He was a great leader a thoughtful and quite passionate man obviously for Ngati Porou. He will be sadly missed in terms of the representation and leadership that he has given not only his iwi but the wider country.I also want to acknowledge Celia Lashlie. I had met her a couple of times. I was very impressed with both her stature and her forthrightness in what boys in particular look for in good solid family relationships. I am the eldest of four boys. It would be fair to say that I think my parents took a leaf out of her book and perhaps in a small way I am a contribution to her outlook on life.It is very enjoyable to be actually standing up here and talking to this particular piece of legislation the Social Security Amendment Bill (No 3). When I look at legislation like this—and I note the comments before of fellow MP Darroch Ball being new here and looking at it for the first time. I think his comments around bringing fresh eyes to the debate is one that resonates for me as someone who is brand new to this place. Although we have different eyes Darroch I tried to do the same. Essentially I asked myself three questions. The first is whether this is targeting a demonstrated need. I asked whether it is fair for the applicant and for the taxpayer—those thousands of hard-working New Zealanders whose taxes we have the responsibility to spend effectively and appropriately. I guess ultimately I asked whether it is delivering an improved outcome. In my view I think this bill delivers on all those three thresholds.It is important that we provide assistance to those who need it most. I think everyone understands that that is a key component of who we are as a country. It has underpinned our social services framework for many many decades. But it is just as important that we can give assurances to taxpayers in particular that assistance is being distributed fairly and that any loopholes identified where inequitable disparities can occur are closed. So at the fundamental core of this legislation is a view that we need to do the right thing by those who are seeking to have support from the Government and to do the right thing also by those who are paying taxes to ensure that that tax is being well and effectively spent.It is appropriate in my view that we have a framework that prevents students who are eligible for a student allowance from applying for and receiving the accommodation supplement. So I have found it interesting just listening to the debate over the last 20 or 30 minutes particularly from the Green Party members. I would have to say that I did not quite get at the end really whether they are for it or against it. They spoke on both sides of the argument. I appreciate that when we brought this to the House the first time—and obviously subsequently it then went away through to the select committee process—I was not here and neither were a number of others. But I understood that it had a broad cross-section of party support. So I thought the Green Party members would be able to see this through rational eyes particularly when you consider the sartorial elegance of at least one of them who is sitting over on the other side. I appreciate your choice of tie sir. It is just where it needs to be. I honestly thought that the Green Party when you strip away the rhetoric would have actually said that this is something that deserved its support. I am disappointed that apparently if I heard them correctly it perhaps still does not.The accommodation supplement is intended to assist low to middle income people with accommodation costs not for those who are seeking to lift their skills at a tertiary or vocational institute and who can receive the student benefit. There may well be a debate—Darroch Ball: That’s not equitable.TODD MULLER: I understand you are shaking your head and that is fair enough. It is interesting that when you have a debate around student allowances immediately it goes to saying particularly on the other side that it is not enough and it needs to be improved—it needs to be lifted. There never seems to be an acknowledgment that actually there is a benefit that accrues to the student by going to university. This is a very very generous scheme and it has resulted in more students being involved in tertiary and vocational institutions than ever before. But it is still not good enough. It is still not good enough for members on the other side. Everything should be free. It does not matter how we earn it in this country it should be free.Tracey Martin: Did you get a free education?TODD MULLER: No I did not. And for New Zealanders who work to be able to pay taxes I find it a remarkable remarkable—Tracey Martin: Silent—there you go.TODD MULLER: Well it was not silence—I was talking. I was trying to talk over your constant questioning. Look at this rate I am going to have to sit down before I have got to the main points which would be quite extraordinary.Kris Faafoi: Have you got one?TODD MULLER: I have got a number. So for example for a sole parent in Auckland with two children the maximum amount they can be paid in an accommodation supplement is $225—Tracey Martin: It’s not about them.TODD MULLER: You might learn something if you listen seriously. That is $225 per week compared with $60—[Interruption] oh they have woken up—for an accommodation benefit on the student allowance. The returns from study—as I have said before to members on the other side of the House particularly to New Zealand First members—accrue to individuals as well as to society. So the clear policy behind the student loan and allowance system is to share the cost between students and the Government. Students should not be reliant on other benefits and grants that result in the Government paying a greater share of student support.This is a very fine piece of legislation and one that deserves our support. I would just like to finish—because it is remarkable how fast the time goes when you are having fun—with some comments in respect of ACC. Again in my view there is a principle at stake here. Any payment received by an ACC recipient should then be deducted dollar for dollar from any benefit they receive. This deduction needs to occur whether the payments are made by ACC or any accredited employer. I think I heard from the other side that there is a general acknowledgment that that is a sound piece of public policy. It is therefore a piece of legislation that should get hopefully pretty universal support. It is inequitable that claimants in essentially the same circumstances can be treated differently.This bill is about getting the incentives right. It is about removing the opportunity to game the system. It is about fairness it is about equity and above all it is about ensuring we have the collective confidence in our social services and compensation frameworks. It is a sound bill. I do want to acknowledge those who have gone before in the Social Services Committee and who have brought this bill to this place. I want to acknowledge the Minister for Social Development. I think that she provides great leadership in this space and I commend the bill to the House.