Martin TraceyHon TRACEY MARTIN (Minister for Seniors): Kia ora Mr Assistant Speaker thank you very much. I rise on behalf of the Government and New Zealand First to support the Rates Rebate (Retirement Village Residents) Amendment Bill. I thank the honourable member Jami-Lee Ross for his contribution I thank him for his critique and I thank him for his suggestions. I also thank him for putting in to the Hansard the National Party's support for a complete review of the Rates Rebate Act 1973 and I look forward to working with him going forward now that we have the support of the National Party on the record around that Act because he is quite right—there is a need to review that Act from 1973. There's been tweaking around it and it's a shame that he and his Government didn't do it over the last nine years. But I look forward over the next decade or so to working with him from this side of the House to make sure that we can support our seniors more appropriately. Also I appreciate him rearticulating the fact that the National Party will not support this small measure to try and assist some of our senior citizens to stretch their restricted incomes a little bit further. It's always interesting to have the National Party rearticulate why they will do nothing. So I appreciate the fact that—because it's been a long time since we were here talking about this. It's been a long time since this was in select committee. There's been an election there's been coalition negotiations and there's been a whole new Government formed. But that party has remained true to their opposition to actually giving our seniors a little bit more support while we go forward. That is true. Mr Jami-Lee Ross is correct that officials advised that they would need to be satisfied that the characteristics normally associated with a home were going to be associated with those of our seniors who now live in situations where they have a licence to occupy. There seems to be with all due respect and Mr Lee Ross has been on this—oh sorry it's Jami-Lee Ross. I beg your pardon. Mr Ross has been on this side of the House so he will know as I know that there is a tone of Government that permeates officials' advice when they come to select committee. I've sat on select committees where I have asked officials Why is this your answer? Why is this in this bill?" and they have said "It is the policy of this Government." So to suggest that one Government official's advice based on the policy of the Government that they were publicly serving should therefore be uplifted at all costs by a new Government with a new policy direction is a little disingenuous. These are our older citizens' homes. Whether they have a licence to occupy is actually irrelevant around this support. This is about recognising that these seniors pay towards the rates of that village and many a large village owner—and Mr Doocey is shaking his head—has said to me "I don't make any profit. I don't make any profit out of these villages only on capital gain." Many a large village owner has said "I'm virtually a saint. I'm doing this because I believe in providing for these older citizens." But these older citizens are living on a very restricted income and all this Government is trying to do is maximise their opportunity to have a little bit more joy a little bit more disposable income and recognition—Brett Hudson: Then write a decent bill. Hon TRACEY MARTIN: —that they pay Mr Hudson. Go and talk to your granny because I tell you she will reinforce what I am saying to you now. All they want is a little bit more stretch to the meagre amount of how they are supported by their State and that's what this Government will do. This is a first step towards other things. This bill will be a first step to recognising that they do contribute to the rates across that village they are ratepayers and they should have access under the criteria. There are criteria and Mr Ross pointed out that those criteria have been set in place for a very long time and definitely need a review because some of our seniors—particularly let's say in Auckland—whose rates have shot through the roof and whose super has actually been attached with the Consumers Price Index have now lost their opportunity to even access through the criteria the rates rebate because the rates rebate income level has not moved as quickly as the other things. So from our perspective we're interested that the National Party has continued along this tack. We find it disappointing and we found it disappointing then. I enjoy it when the Opposition suggests that the Government is reckless when supporting New Zealand citizens. If we—this Government—are going to recklessly recognise that some of our seniors do live in owner-occupied circumstances and do provide funding towards the rates over the complete complex and if we're going to recklessly support those citizens to actually be able to lift in some way their standard of living then I am happy that we are reckless in that way. I think from our perspective we need to recognise that by 2036 1.2 million New Zealanders are going to be in the category of seniors. We need to recognise that this is not a single issue when we talk about this particular demographic but one of many that we are going to have to address very very quickly. So I'm not going to take up much more time. I believe it's an obvious bill to support. There may be nuances in it—I mean it sounds a little bit like saying "Let them eat cake." If we can't give them the whole shebang then let's not give anybody anything—that's what it sounds like from Mr Ross and this Government is not inclined in that direction. If it's only a little we can do and only a few thousand of our citizens that actually benefit from this bill then it is a few thousand that have benefited and we will continue to work to make sure that our other seniors who need our support are able to gain our support. But we won't stop just because it doesn't give everybody cake."