3. Child Poverty—Target Setting Policy and PrevalenceANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime MinisterChild Poverty—Target Setting Policy and Prevalence3. ANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does the Government intend to meet all the targets it has set; if so why does it think setting those targets was important?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): We tend to make good progress towards those targets because they are focused on addressing some of New Zealand's biggest challenges. For example we have set practical targets in the areas that contribute to material hardship and poverty. These include increasing infant immunisation rates reducing rheumatic fever increasing early childhood education participation and reducing the number of assaults on children.Andrew Little: Given the importance he places on targets why does he oppose Children's Commissioner Judge Andrew Becroft's target of reducing the number of children living in material deprivation by 10 percent?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The Government is certainly not opposed to the individual components of what Judge Becroft was talking about. Actually the Government has been doing a great deal in terms of working on those including increasing benefits increasing Working for Families payments and increasing childcare assistance just as an example. But it is important to understand that my advice is that Judge Becroft's target actually comes off a survey or a poll which is then factored up so I do not think that would actually be a terribly good measure.Andrew Little: Oh so he doesn't know what he's talking about?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No he does not actually.Andrew Little: Is the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child correct that there is an enduring high prevalence of poverty among children" in New Zealand; if not why not?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Some children and some families have been in poverty for a very very long time in New Zealand's history. I will say that the United Nations report does not cover the point at which this Government was the first Government in 43 years to raise benefits for families with children. This Government is extremely focused on the needs of those youngsters and that is why it has individual targets on an individualised basis for a great many of them. We do not believe in and the official advice does not support one single target for poverty.Andrew Little: Why are there more children living below the poverty line more homeless children more children in material deprivation and more working families turning to food banks under his Government?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I am not sure I wholly accept the member's proposition but some of those factors have been a result of the recession. The good news is that we now have one of the fastest growth rates in the OECD. As the Minister of Finance pointed out in the last question we have had one of the fastest income growth rates in the last 8 years. That is the very reason why the Government did things like not only support Working for Families in the most difficult times but actually extend it. It is why we have free GP visits. It is why this was the first Government in 43 years to raise benefits.Andrew Little: What does he say to Ebony Andrews of Auckland who despite stringent budgeting and working as a learning support teacher is forced to rely on charity for basics like food clothing and shoes for her children?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I simply do not know her circumstances.Andrew Little: Why does he think that it is possible to kill every rat stoat and possum across New Zealand but that it is impossible to ensure that all our kids have a warm house to live in good clothes to wear and food to eat?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Actually this Government has been more focused than probably any other Government on making sure that youngsters are in a warm house. That is why it has insulated 300000 homes which is multiples more than the previous Government did. That is why this Government increased benefits for the first time in 43 years. That is why this Government has been part of a programme with Fonterra and Sanitarium for instance for 7 million breakfasts. The official advice does not support one single definition of poverty and actually interestingly enough one of the reasons that you might not want to do that is that the Opposition itself says that as soon as you put a label on a child—let us say it is now going to be—Mr SPEAKER: Bring the answer to a conclusion.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: —the Ministry for Vulnerable Children—[Interruption] The member does not like it but he wants—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The answer is now drifting on for too long. [Interruption] Order!Andrew Little: In light of that answer and in light of Judge Andrew Becroft's statement that the $25-a-week benefit lift has not made a material difference to many families why does he not cut the crap accept that there is a credible measure to be had and measure his Government's performance on child poverty against it?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I know the member is running out of staff at a great rate of knots but he really needs to get some new and better lines and stop proving to the country that he is "Angry Andrew"—Mr SPEAKER: Order!"