Adams Paul: Social Security (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Adams Paul: Social Security (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:624;Page:19730] 
PAUL ADAMS (United Future) 
: 
 I rise on behalf of United Future to speak on this bill. I also commend Judith Collins for the speech she gave in this House because I heard the heartbeat of a mother as she spoke and I think many others also heard that heartbeat. No doubt many were touched when she made mention of her grandfather who left his seven children with no money. I think the issue that possibly struck a chord with some in this House was that of the family having no money. I want to think of and meditate on that for a moment. In reality today with much of the social engineering that goes on in legislation the issue of money is not as relevant as it was in the time that her grandmother faced that issue. 
But as one who is proud to stand up as a married man a father of four children and a grandfather of 2½ grandchildren—one is still cooking in the oven—I believe that we men have a tremendous responsibility to stand up and be responsible for what we are and that is men and fathers. Yet I have seen in this House legislation that has pulled down and even mocked those who dare to stand up and say that a relationship is important. I have always said and will always continue to say that I am a generational politician. I am very tired of seeing laws come in that focus on one generation—one particular lifestyle. Where are the laws to build the very unit that Judith Collins’ grandmother had pulled apart on her? 
Let me clarify something here. I would never dare to stand and judge why people in a relationship part company. I see many things in society—many things that we have put in place—that make it too easy for us men to walk away. I think one of the major changes was when no-fault divorce came in. I have heard and understand the reasoning for it but it made it just that little bit easier for men to walk away from a responsibility that we should seriously give consideration to. 
Sometimes when we get caught up in issues I believe we fail to ask the right question. I have felt for the Minister of Police in this House as he has been questioned—in many cases I believe unfairly—on the policing issues in this country and on the shortage of police. I am yet to hear one person stand up in this House and ask the real questions on why the crime rate is increasing. I believe that the crime rate is increasing rapidly because fathers are not taking their responsibility to raise the children whom they are responsible for. If we can begin to focus again on the responsibility of being a parent and if we can begin to put things into place that will help parents to do their job better I do not think we will need an increase in the number of police; I think we will see a decline in crime. 
This bill does not assist the establishment of paternity and this is an issue on which United Future would like to see more extensive work done that recognises that the law needs to support the right of children to access information about who their father and mother are. All members relate I am sure to the situation of seeing that faults or habits that we thought were our parents beginning to develop in us as we age. It is quite scary. Even the medical profession is starting to recognise that things are hereditary. If for no other reason children deserve to know who their fathers and mothers are so that at least they can find out areas in their own lives that they will need to work on. United Future wants to acknowledge that establishing paternity is not just about catching dead-beat dads but also about fathers who wish to be involved with their children but who are being denied that by the mothers who want no potential involvement by them. This situation needs to be recognised in law. We are pleased to see the Law Commission is due to report shortly on this DNA testing issue and await significant change to what has been a problematic and at times damaging state of affairs for mothers fathers and children. 
We understand there will be contention over the exemptions to the section 70A penalty that this bill argues. Currently the law allows exemptions to naming if a child was conceived through—