Lees-Galloway Iain: Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is subject to correctionLees-Galloway Iain: Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 23 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:14231. Text is subject to correction.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North): I rise to add another voice to Labour’s support for the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill. The purpose of the bill is to ensure thatunsupported children or orphans receive parity with foster children when it comes to clothing allowances. The Work and Income weekly benefit for the unsupported child and orphan is currently the same as for a foster child under the Children Young Persons and Their Families Act 1989. However the unsupported child or orphan is not eligible for the clothing allowance which is graduated according to age. For children over 13 years of age this quarterly allowance usually covers the child’s secondary school uniform.It is pleasing to see an outbreak of peace in the House this evening. A couple of bills so far have received near unanimous support from all sides of the House and it is hopeful—or at least we on this side hope—that that outbreak of peace may carry on as we venture further into the evening with the bills that are further down the Order Paper. But for now let us discuss the Social Security (Clothing Allowances for Orphans and Unsupported Children) Amendment Bill.A foster carer can apply for a quarterly clothing allowance and an allowance for Christmas and birthday presents. Health and education costs are met and depending on the child’s care plan a carer may also be able to apply for financial assistance towards recreational items. All of this should be extended to unsupported children as well. The policy must be fair so that children are not disadvantaged. Where other items are not extended to unsupported children they should be extended or equal value for them must be received. Quality between the two allowances is a must and that is what Tracey Martin is trying to achieve I believe.Labour believes that if New Zealand really wants the best outcomes for children then we need to invest in and prioritise policies that put a real focus on parents and children. All children in New Zealand regardless of their background regardless of their upbringing regardless of their parents’ situation deserve the best and the same opportunities in life. We believe that this Government needs to do a lot more than it has in its 5 years in office to try to alleviate child poverty. What we needed back at Budget time this year was for the Government to set out a clear plan for child poverty including setting targets to reduce it. Instead basically the cupboard has been left bare. If Budgets show where a Government’s priorities lie then the 2013 Budget shows that this Government is not interested in child poverty.The National Party has started to talk a reasonably good game but it has been a late party on a number of initiatives initially proposed by Labour. These include food in schools for which we have not one but two members’ bills on the Order Paper now to address and that gives the Government two opportunities to get in behind that programme and support it. There is also the Housing Warrant of Fitness a social lending initiative. These are all ideas that National now appears to at least be lukewarm on but it has been a long way behind the Labour Party and other progressive parties in this House in promoting those ideas.The Government has spent the last 5 years talking about the problem and refusing to acknowledge the advice from experts including the Children’s Commissioner that measures and targets must be set to eradicate child poverty. Labour unlike National is serious about ensuring that the 270000 Kiwi children who are living in poverty do not miss out on the many things that most of us take for granted including basic health-care good nutrition and educational opportunities.Over the last 5 years there has been a widening gap between the rich and the poor between those who have and those who do not have. It has been to a certain extent a result of the international financial crisis. In times of recession the gap between the rich and the poor does grow but it has been enormously exacerbated by Government policies—decisions that this Government has taken to give more to those at the top and to take more from those at the bottom. Our inequality gap is shameful. Although wesupport this initiative from Tracey Martin to try to alleviate that gap for some children in our society what we need is a Government that is prepared to tackle the whole problem.