Dyson Ruth: Social Assistance (Payment of New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Overseas) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Dyson Ruth: Social Assistance (Payment of New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Overseas) Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Sitting date: 20 October 2009. Volume:658;Page:7292. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
: 
 That was an extraordinary speech from the Hon Sir Roger Douglas who criticised both the Government and the Labour Party and described the Social Assistance (Payment of New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Overseas) Amendment Bill as being preferential and as some sort of back-door deal to allow people from Pacific countries to come to New Zealand in order to get a pension. That speech came from a member of Parliament who not only earns $100000-plus in his job—and I am sure he earns that money—but also is one of the few members of this House who are still entitled to receive the gold-plated parliamentary superannuation scheme as well as his national superannuation entitlement. He comes to this House to criticise what is quite a small amendment but one that will allow people who have earned their entitlement to New Zealand superannuation to then retire in countries of their choice without being disadvantaged. I think the country will be gobsmacked by the cheek of that speech. 
Hon Sir Roger Douglas 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I do not really want to interrupt the member but she should not make the sorts of accusations that she is making. In fact since I came back into Parliament I have no longer drawn parliamentary superannuation. I think the member knows that but for her to say that is incorrect. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: That is not strictly a point of order. 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: The Minister John Carter who spoke earlier in the debate talked about his support and National’s support for this legislation and about how he was looking forward to his retirement time and to being able perhaps to take advantage of this amendment to the superannuation legislation as we all will be able to do when we retire. The Hon John Carter who will be entitled to receive New Zealand superannuation in just under 6 years’ time may well have spoken with confidence about that but I personally do not share that confidence. The reason why I do not share that confidence is that even though in this particular instance the Government is supporting legislation that will benefit hard-working New Zealanders who have earned superannuation it has also in this very same year gutted the fund that gives New Zealanders confidence in their future entitlement to New Zealand superannuation at all. 
This Government has committed New Zealand to a decade of deferred payment to the New Zealand Superannuation Fund. That fund gave all of us who were in our 30s 40s or 50s confidence that we could look forward to a retirement age of 65 and know that we would be able to receive superannuation at its current level. The gutting of that fund means that New Zealanders like the Hon John Carter when he retires at the age of 65 on 8 May 2015 will no longer be able to have the confidence that he will receive that superannuation. 
Not only was that a very bad move for superannuitants but also it was very bad in terms of basic financial management. I am not sure how the Hon Bill English managed to convince the entire National caucus to support the gutting of the scheme. When Treasury did its analysis it said that by 2031 when the withdrawals from the Superannuation Fund will be completed the fund will be short by $35 billion. That is how much money Bill English has taken out of the fund and that is how much money we will be short of when we try to ensure that superannuitants in the future will be able to receive superannuation at the current level. Treasury also said—again I say this is Treasury information—that Bill English’s plan gutted the Superannuation Fund by 50 percent and that we will never be able to catch up that money. If we have the decade of deferrals of payments into the New Zealand Superannuation Fund we will never catch up. 
I am not even sure whether National wants to catch up on those payments. John Key has said publicly to the media that as soon as New Zealand is in surplus again the Government will start to contribute to the Superannuation Fund but at the very same time his deputy Bill English said on the public record that there would have to be trade-offs in the future if we were to return to investing in our future superannuation which is what the Superannuation Fund is about. He said there would have to be trade-offs between a resumption of contributions to the Superannuation Fund tax cuts and spending. We all know where Bill English’s choice lies. He has always gone for tax cuts now particularly for those who are very high-income earners at the expense of investing in future superannuation payments. People who are now in their 40s and 50s and even in their early 60s hard-working New Zealanders who are paying their taxes and paying their way in our society have not received a tax cut from Bill English or the National Government because the tax cuts programme went as soon as the Government could get away with it. All the tax cuts went to the highest-income earners. Now people know that they will not have the confidence to look forward at 65 years of age to receiving superannuation in the future. 
Although the National members come to this House and say they support this bill which was introduced under the previous Labour Government those words have very little meaning to people who know that New Zealanders might be able to retire overseas and be better off under this legislation but that we will not actually receive superannuation at the level that it is currently paid at. So this Government gives with one hand and takes away much more with the other. 
That is not the only area where National has taken something away from older people. Day after day we have heard concerns being raised by my colleague Maryan Street and a total denial from the Minister for Tertiary Education Anne Tolley about the damage that is being done in our communities by the 80 percent gutting of the Adult and Community Education fund. A lot of older New Zealanders will be very badly affected by that. People who are at home on their own who have worked hard all their lives and who get to 65 now have some time. They might be able to learn something they have always wanted to learn. They might be very lonely so they might want to go to a night class or a class during the day to develop some friendships. Or they might just want to get out of their house. Anne Tolley said they can just pay for adult and community education themselves. Unfortunately our schools throughout the country and our community centres which have been running these night classes and other classes during the day have said they cannot afford to run them any more because Anne Tolley has gutted the fund that has made those services available to thousands and thousands of particularly older New Zealanders for many years. Again I say the Government is supporting this legislation but taking away the opportunity for older New Zealanders to go to night classes. 
The Minister for ACC who I hope will be in the House later on this afternoon to try to explain yet again his position on accident compensation has made one of the most savage cuts to older people that any of us can imagine. It is to take away the funding for a programme that is not only good but also highly regarded internationally a programme that has been well researched and proven to be successful. That is the falls prevention programme. Up and down the country older people have been learning how to strengthen their muscles and how to have better balance so that they can reduce the risk of falling injuring themselves breaking hips and putting huge costs on to not just our health system but also themselves and their families personally. That programme is designed specifically to help older people to reduce the risk of falling and being injured. It has been gutted; it is gone. There is no more money. Once again I say that although the National Government says it supports this legislation introduced by a Labour-led Government it is taking away yet another thing from older people. 
Of course we have also heard particularly from my Canterbury colleagues Jim Anderton Lianne Dalziel Clayton Cosgrove and Brendon Burns about the savage cuts in home support for older people. For many people a couple of hours of home support at very low rates of pay and at very low cost to the taxpayer is the difference between that person being able to stay safely and well in his or her own home and having to move into a rest home. It provides people with a genuine choice about where they want to live and it provides them with the opportunity to stay in their home often right up until the time that they die. Now we are seeing further cuts in the health system and front-line services being cut for some of the most vulnerable people in our community: older New Zealanders who have worked hard and contributed by raising their families or by being in a paid job. They are people who deserve to be respected and valued rather than to be at the cutting edge of health cuts. 
I support this bill and urge its progress.