Ardern Jacinda: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Ardern Jacinda: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 23 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4711. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
3. 
JACINDA ARDERN (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development 
: Does she agree with the recommendation made by Every Child Counts in its  
Netherlands Study 
 that national indicators of child well-being should be adopted so progress can be measured; if not why not? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development) 
: 
 The Government is already working on a number of the recommendations that have been made in this report but this is not one of them. The children of this country do not have precious time to waste on yet another debate on what measures their well-being. This Government has led the most comprehensive and substantial debate on child well-being this country has ever seen through its green paper process. The white paper will be out shortly and the public can judge us on that. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: Does she believe that a child can have all of its basic needs met while living in a household on 50 percent of the median income in New Zealand? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: I am sure that would not be easy and I have absolutely no doubt that there are children in this country who are living in poverty. That is why this Government is focused on growing this economy and getting better jobs for those people so that they can move off welfare in many cases and see a brighter future for themselves and their children. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: Does she believe that the decrease in median household incomes in real terms as set out in the incomes report released today has played a role in hardship rates for children rising from 15 percent to 21 percent on her watch? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: Yes and I think that what we have seen is that the effects of the global economy have really hit those people hard. [ 
Interruption 
] Well it is the reality. The Labour Party members might like to think that that has not happened but actually jobs were lost people on part-time work lost some hours and that unsurprisingly has had a direct effect on some of those people’s household incomes. What we have done is protect those who are really at the bottom with Consumers Price Index adjustments by making sure that we actually looked after those who were on benefits when the GST changes were made and by looking after those children and families as I think we have got a role to do. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: Does she agree with the suggestion in the  
Netherlands Study 
 that a universal child or family benefit should be a medium-term goal for her Government as a way to move children out of poverty? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: What I did note in that study also is that it talked about the economy of the Netherlands—and certainly of those Nordic countries—and about the kinds of choices you get to make when you have that stronger economy and that sort of money to spend. I think that that is what this Government is pretty well focused on. I hope we debate when we have got extra cash to spend where it goes and how those children get it. At the moment we have got the books to sort out we have got a country to get back into surplus and that is our focus. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question related directly to the suggestion in the study and to whether or not the Minister agreed that it should be a medium-term goal for the Government to look into a child or family benefit to move children out of poverty. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I accept that that was the question. The member did seek an opinion—whether the Minister agreed—but it would have been helpful if the Minister could have indicated in her answer whether or not she did agree with universal child support arrangements if I recollect the question correctly. 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: Certainly. My point is that actually the Netherlands economy is so much better off and they have so much more money to spend that they can make those sorts of choices as to whether or not they have a universal child benefit or what it is they spend on. We actually do not have that luxury in New Zealand at this time but I do hope that we do have it in the future. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question did not ask about the relative economic situations in the Netherlands versus New Zealand. It asked whether or not as a consequence of the study as recommended by Every Child Counts the Government would be looking into the possibility of a child or family benefit. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! Well no that was not what the question asked. The question asked whether the Minister agreed with that finding from the study that a universal child support system was important. The Minister in her answer because the question was asking for her opinion—whether she agreed with that—indicated that at the moment she could not agree with that because she was arguing New Zealand was not in a position to be even contemplating that at present if I interpreted the Minister’s answer correctly. If I am wrong then the Minister should correct me. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: Does she take any responsibility for according to the income report released today under her Government inequality in New Zealand being the worst it has ever been? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: As I have already said I am sure that the Labour Party would like to ignore the conditions of the last 3½ years. But they are real. They have affected if anyone those on the lower and middle incomes of this country. We actually stand here and I tell you what New Zealanders say: “Thank goodness for a National Government that has managed its way through it and is now seeing real progress.” that I think we will see as we move out of that. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Could I invite you either to ask the Minister to answer the question or to provide an interpretation for us as you did previously to indicate what the answer was if in fact the question was addressed? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Well in fairness the question was certainly addressed because the Minister clearly indicated in her answer that she did not disagree with what the member was saying in her question and explained why she did not disagree with what the member was proposing in her question. I cannot get too pedantic about the detail of an answer.