Ardern Jacinda: Social Security (Benefit Review and Appeal Reform) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Ardern Jacinda: Social Security (Benefit Review and Appeal Reform) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:656;Page:5738] 
JACINDA ARDERN (Labour) 
: 
 I am pleased to rise and speak in support of this member’s bill the Social Security (Benefit Review and Appeal Reform) Amendment Bill in the name of Sue Bradford. I would like to reaffirm and restate some of the support that has been given to that member who once again is bringing forth what I think is both a timely and crucial piece of legislation in an area that is desperately in need of some support at this particular point in time. We are at present entering an environment where we are more in need than ever of giving additional support to Kiwis who have fallen on hard times. More than ever we are seeing that vulnerable Kiwis who have their rights as citizens in New Zealand to seek the support of the State are being vilified in the public sphere. As a member of this House that is something I deeply regret seeing. 
In my very short time here I have seen some of what I perceive to be crucial support mechanisms provided by the State come under fire. The example I will draw on is the independent youth benefit. We saw recently that the Government put forth a support package for young people but in the very same breath it stated that the independent youth benefit that crucial benefit that is drawn on by no more than 1500 young people would have additional layers of eligibility requirements attached to it before young people would be able to access it. Let me restate to this House that that benefit is extraordinarily difficult for a young person to receive—extraordinarily difficult. Two-thirds of the young people who receive that benefit are already in work training or education. They must go to great lengths to prove they are eligible for that benefit. Let us not be under any illusions: we run a tight ship when it comes to our welfare State. To purport otherwise I believe is dishonest yet we have done so with that particular benefit. Young people must already prove that they psychologically require access to that support mechanism yet we are now putting in an additional layer of requirement for an already vulnerable group of people. 
We have already seen as well the release of information on beneficiaries for political point-scoring and now we see there will be a review of the 50 top—I do not know what the Government wants to call them but they are a group of beneficiaries whom the Government considers are worthy of review. I do not want to comment on the specific details of those individuals but for me this feels like a wider softening up of the public. In this environment I think it is important now more than ever that we ensure that our system is balanced and for me this bill is a rebalance of power. 
We have in New Zealand a number of authorities that provide accountability structures. We have ombudsmen for various institutions whether for insurance banking or our parliamentary system. The principles behind ombudsmen are that they are independent that they respond to and review complaints in a timely manner and that they are accessible. In my mind these are the same principles that should apply to any appeal board that looks at benefits that are awarded or denied in this country. Those same principles should apply in these cases. Those are criteria that I would expect a select committee to consider when looking at this bill. 
In particular I am very pleased that not only are we adding independence to a structure that I believe so desperately needs it; we are also adding time limits. But I ask the select committee to perhaps look further at the specific time limits when issuing a formal ruling. I may have missed a detail in this but perhaps in the process itself we might also need to build in time limits to ensure that the process does not unnecessarily drag or cause undue distress for those individuals involved in it. 
I again reiterate my strong support for this bill. In the current environment we are in I think it is timely I think it is necessary and I think it will bring greater consistency to those other similar structures that we already have in our system. I once again congratulate the member on bringing this issue to the House.