Logie Jan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Logie Jan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 28 February 2012. Volume:677;Page:579. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
12. 
JAN LOGIE (Green) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development 
: Does she agree with the statement in her Cabinet paper that “Evidence shows that support for beneficiaries to undertake study such as the Training Incentive Allowance can be effective in increasing the time participants spend off benefits.”? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development) 
: 
 At times yes. I have always been and will continue to be a staunch advocate that for some people study can change their lives. The argument is how much should people invest in their own study and how much should the Government subsidise that study. 
Jan Logie 
: Does she believe that the Government should provide extra support for beneficiaries for whom tertiary study at level 4 or above is the best way to reduce their long-term cost to the Government? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: We currently do through subsidies for extra childcare for them. With the extra support they get they can also access an additional interest-free student loan which other students actually cannot get so they do get that sort of assistance. But as previously said in this House we are actually putting in investment through the training incentive allowance for the more than 50 percent of those on the domestic purposes benefit who have absolutely no qualifications and cannot even get a foot on the first rung of that ladder. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: Why is a sole parent with exactly the same set of circumstances eligible for more assistance if they train to become a hairdresser than if they train to be a nurse as set out by her training incentive allowance policy? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: As I said the assistance they can get is based on the level so for level 4 and above they do not get the training incentive allowance but for level 3 and under they can. So there are different ones. I am not sure exactly what qualifications fit in with them but that is the way that the system is set up. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question was quite specific. It did not ask what the policy was; it asked for the rationale behind the policy—why is there the difference that the Minister just outlined. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I thought I heard the Minister answer that. She said some courses are above level 3 and some are level 3 and below and that is why there is the difference. That may not be the explanation that the member wanted but it is certainly an explanation of the difference. 
Jan Logie 
: Then why does her Cabinet paper say: “I believe that we need to provide some extra support for the small group of beneficiaries that may be identified by the investment approach as those for whom higher-level tertiary study at level 4 or above is the best way to reduce their long-term liability.”? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: It is true that the investment approach is going to fundamentally change the whole way that we offer support through the benefits system. I am not going to pre-empt the Work and Income board which is yet to be appointed or its investment approach—where it will decide it needs to put the most investment. But as the paper quite rightly says it could be that it looks at level 4 and above and decides to do things differently. It will look at level 3 and below and try to do that differently I am sure as well. So without pre-empting it it could decide that there could be extra assistance needed for level 4 and above. 
Jan Logie 
: To clarify is the Minister saying she has not ruled out implementing the Green Party’s policy to reinstate the training incentive allowance for study at level 4 and higher? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: What I was saying was that the system is going to look fundamentally different as we move forward. I am not sure that everyone kind of grasps the difference that the investment approach is going to make—  
Dr Rajen Prasad 
: Oh we’re so dumb aren’t we? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: —well it is incredibly complex—and it could actually look at that. Who knows it may actually be in line with the Green Party’s policy. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: Why is a sole parent with exactly the same set of circumstances eligible for more assistance if they train to become a hairdresser at level 3 than if they train to be a nurse at level 5 as set out in her current policy? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: You will find that that training for a hairdresser is actually the pre-training that they do up to level 3. They do not actually leave once they have done those few weeks of study or those 6 months of study and become a hairdresser; they then go into apprenticeships and have a long time in work-based learning. They do not actually walk out with the qualification ready to be a full-time hairdresser.