Lotu-Iiga Sam: Child Support Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Lotu-Iiga Sam: Child Support Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 27 February 2013. Volume:687;Page:8277. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to speak on the Committee stage of the Child Support Amendment Bill and to support it. The reason I support it is that this bill transforms this area of the law and makes it more effective makes it fairer and makes it more efficient to distribute child support to those kids who need that funding. I think members who have already spoken on the bill earlier and who are opposing the bill misunderstand actually what this bill stands for. This bill presented by the Minister of Revenue the Hon Peter Dunne does not seek to solve all the problems of the world and the problems that children have in our society. All this bill does is act as a mechanism by which payments are made and collected between parties often spouses who have raised a kid but who for some reason whatever reason have found themselves separated. It is the payments between those parties that this bill covers. 
So where people are talking about solving poverty and where people are talking about making this bill more effective and about the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child that is not what this bill solves. I think if you read the bill and you read the commentary you understand that the mechanism to have those transfer payments made is within this bill. There are a whole range of other programmes and payment schedules that deal with those problems. Working for Families the accommodation supplements that various families receive—those are the appropriate payments to be made to support families and to support especially young children being raised in our country. So I think we need to get the context around what this bill actually covers. 
The other part of the context which Mr Cunliffe referred to in his speech was around the debt around child support. We in the Finance and Expenditure Committee 2 years ago—and I know he sat on that select committee—actually looked at why those payments and penalties have escalated over time. He said that $2.3 billion had accumulated much of it in penalties and much of it leading—and he is agreeing with me; I am glad we agree on some things—to distorted behaviour in those who were liable for certain payments to actually abscond move away and not make those payments on the basis of the penalties that had been incurred over time. That is why this bill is solving that type of problem. It is not about the punitive aspects of child support; it is about effectively managing the payments that are made to those children so that the children who are in receipt of these moneys are able to benefit from them. That is what this bill does. 
Admittedly as has been stated across this Chamber the bill has a complicated formula but I submit that we should give credit to the people of New Zealand that they will be able to understand these things when they sit down with their adviser or an Inland Revenue Department officer when they sit down with those people who are able to assist. The formula is an objective formula that is based on a calculation and based on modern ways of looking after children. The expenditure that is incurred for children and the incomes that those parents derive from their everyday lives—those are the factors that are taken into account when that formula is calculated. I ask members if they do not understand to read the bill to sit down and read it— 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I seek leave to table a copy of the formula because the member either cannot remember— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: No. The member is interrupting a debate. 
Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA 
: Well the “Prince of Ponsonby” might not understand it but I certainly do. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. In the second reading of this debate we firmly established that Ponsonby is not in the New Lynn electorate yet— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The member will resume his seat. That is not a point of order. The member is interrupting the flow of debate and it is unacceptable. 
Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA 
: All I will say about the formula is that it is objective and it leads to fairer outcomes. Admittedly there are some who will lose money according to the formula but it is an objective formula that you can look up or you can get advice on. Thank you.