Bennett Paula: Budget Debate 
Bennett Paula: Budget Debate 
[Volume:654;Page:4256] 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 How out of touch was the speech that we have just heard! If any of the members opposite bothered to go out and speak to the public they would understand that the public gets it. The public have been spoken to as if they are stupid for far too many years now but when we present them with transparency with choices and with a Budget that is making responsible decisions in these dire economic times the public understand. When we give people a long-term focus on turning this situation around for the betterment of New Zealand they understand it. However when we scaremonger and try to tell New Zealanders facts and figures that are not true they understand. They are responsible and they understand that they have the best people as the servants of their money and of them. That is what we have seen with this Budget. 
No Budget is easy to pull together and this one has been especially difficult. This is the first chance I have had to speak in the Budget debate. I want to acknowledge the work done by Bill English. It has been an interesting process to go through when we know that the need and the demand are out there but there is less money in the till and we have to think about how that is spent and where those priorities are. The Government has had to do more with less but we have managed to achieve that. In the middle of the biggest global economic downturn in generations this Government has managed to deliver on its promises. 
I am especially pleased about that when it comes to social services spending. Today I want to talk a bit about that social services spending and what it means for New Zealanders. We are at a stage where more people are going on the unemployment benefit. The number of those going on to the domestic purposes benefit the sickness benefit and the invalids benefit has increased as well. The reality is that jobs are harder to find. They are not out there in the same capacity. We are making sure that we deal with that which we have stepped out to do in this Budget. As members heard in question time today there is more money in the Estimates of Appropriations so that we can pay out those benefits in a timely manner. When we compare where our country is with Ireland it is an interesting comparison. Ireland is at a stage where it cannot help people into work; there simply are not the jobs there. Its biggest focus is just on paying out benefits within 28 days. 
How lucky we are to be in New Zealand and have the sort of system we have via Work and Income whereby when people first walk in they are talked to about how they will get a job where those jobs are and whether they have a CV and they are then put on a Straight 2 Work programme which the previous Government set up. We always said that we would back what works and that we did not have to come in change everything and put everyone into turmoil. We said that it was about putting our own priorities there and backing what works. A lot of what the previous Government put in as far as the job focus within Work and Income is working. We have had to put more resources behind it. We have had to put more people on the front line. We have had to put more of a focus on why employers should come to Work and Income and put their jobs there first so that we can put in those people who are most desperately looking for work—those who are on a benefit. A lot of work is going into that. 
There is a change of focus in that sort of direction as far as making those sorts of opportunities available. Last week I spoke to my counterpart in the UK who was here for just a day and he said he had trouble recognising that we talk to people about work first then talk to them about putting them on a benefit how that works and what would work for them. We have heard so much scaremongering from the opposite side of the House and about how those opportunities have not been picked up or continued by the community and voluntary sector but that sector understands that the Pathways to Partnership money is staying. We have moved some of that money forward from out-years because the need is now and we needed to step up and recognise that. 
Right from day one when we became the Government it was hugely concerning to us that we saw a sector that would have increased demand and decreased funding from non-governmental money. Those social service agencies out there that are working in the not-for-profit sector were finding that the trusts were drying up the philanthropy was not the same and the donations that they had come to expect to present their services were no longer there. That story was not happening once or twice; it was happening all of the time. We wanted to step up and say that we would play a role in this short-term need and that is what we have done. 
We have continued Pathways to Partnership as it has been in previous years. The previous Government spent about $59 million on Pathways to Partnership and that $59 million was obviously rolled over into the next year so none of that funding was cut. It has continued and the sector can rely on it and that was important to us. We made a CPI adjustment to that money so that it was guaranteed. On top of that was just $20 million that we had to think about how to spend. We did not want to think about it on our own. 
The difference with this Government is that we will not stand around and say that we know what is best for New Zealand. We want to give communities a say because we know that they know what is best for them. We got those people around a table and we asked them: “If you had this amount of money what would that mean and how could we best utilise it to keep those essential social services running in these dire times?”. We came up with the Community Response Fund. We decided that we would bring some of that $20 million forward for this coming year because it is needed now. Equally we think that things may be still tougher next year—certainly the trusts and philanthropy will not be getting the same returns on their investments next year—so we have brought a bit more of that money forward. I am hugely proud to say that there will be another $64 million there for those agencies to work out how they keep those essential social services running. 
I will be clear one more time: the money from Pathways to Partnership stays. It is quite funny because we heard last week the uproar from Labour asking where the line in the Budget for Pathways to Partnership was and whether we had taken it away. If those members had known anything they would understand that under their Government there was no line in the Budget for Pathways to Partnership. The money for Pathways to Partnership comes from a number of different votes and it is how those are added up in the Budget that determines those amounts. There was a little bit of thinking that had to go on by the Opposition but it seems that those members finally grasped that yes the money is there and it is just being spent in a different way in these different economic times. 
While I am talking about community organisations I will talk about Enterprising Communities. There are a few myths going round at the moment that we are cutting those organisations that are currently working and doing a good job. I have a quote from the Hon Darren Hughes who in August last year said about Enterprising Communities: “organisations and groups develop initiatives that will lead to economic growth local job opportunities and long-term sustainability. Community projects are supported financially by the MSD for a maximum of three years and are expected to achieve long-term sustainability from here on.” and that is exactly it. With Enterprising Communities what is happening is what happened under Labour. Organisations thought they could generate employment they were given a lump of money in the first year and that lump of money went down in the second year because members should remember they are trying to get sustainable so they can run themselves. It is a short-term 3-year funding project and in the third year the funding was considerably less again because they were building themselves up into being sustainable and running themselves. All of those that are currently in that 3-year cycle will stay in that cycle and we will support them to get out of it. They have my complete backing to see them get to a place where they are sustainable. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: Just wait until they apply to the contestable fund! 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: The member on the other side the little snappy turtle has her head up and is trying to bark something out. Let me make it clear: the previous Government was the one that said the funding went for 3 years and the organisations had to make themselves sustainable. I want to be quite clear about Enterprising Communities and where it is at. It is true we are not taking on new contracts under Enterprising Communities; we have other priorities and have made different decisions. 
That member was also yelling across the House in her most dulcet tones about health camps. I think it is time that she stood up and recognised that for 9 years the previous Government did nothing. For 9 years the previous Government did nothing with health camps and those camps became run down. They did not get the sorts of things they needed and for 9 years nothing happened with health camps. I think us taking 9 months to make sure they are OK is a good thing and we are in very positive discussions with those health camps. Thank you.