Dyson Ruth: New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDyson Ruth: New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 16 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:10164. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills): Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak to clause 2 of this legislation the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill. I am particularly keen to speak to this because I have an amendment in my name to this clause.As my colleague Chris Hipkins has mentioned this is a very narrow provision in the legislation. Clause 2 deals solely with the commencement. As it stands it says: “This Act comes into force on the day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent.” Generally that would not be a problem. Generally Parliament would agree to that but generally a bill of this nature which does not require any urgency to be accorded to it would have gone through a proper parliamentary process. It would have had an introduction from the Minister it would have been referred to a select committee the select committee would have called for submissions from members of the public and the members of the select committee—in this case it would have been chaired by Dr Paul Hutchison—would have been able to look at the legislation with fresh eyes and without the tainting of the Minister who has shepherded it through to this stage and obviously has a close and vested interest in its passing.The select committee could have looked at it with fresh eyes and members of the public could have had their say about this legislation but none of that has taken place. Instead we are seeing in an absolute breach of the protocol of Budget urgency this bill being rammed through all stages one after another after another. So at midnight tonight or tomorrow morning—I do not know when—this bill will be passed without a single member of the public having had the opportunity to have their say.This is not a technical bill and this is not a bill that is irrelevant to people; this is a bill that cuts to the heart of families in New Zealand who have disabled members. This bill is about whether or not family members when they provide home care for disabled family members are able to get paid. But because of the commencement date and the process that has been undertaken by this arrogant and out-of-touch Minister none of those family members will have a say.My amendment to this clause reads as follows: “After the current wording”—which I just alluded to—“insert: (1) This Bill can only be submitted for Royal Assent if the Bill has been submitted to the Health Select Committee for public consultation and comment prior to the Third Reading.” With that amendment we could have this debate. We could hear the Minister’s justifications for this bill being so limited. We could hear the Minister’s justification for extinguishing the rights of excluded family members so the family members who are not covered who will continue supporting their familymembers but will not get paid can hear not only why they have had their payment denied by the Minister but also why their rights to the Human Rights Review Tribunal have been extinguished. They would be able to have a say at the select committee if my amendment was passed.I do not think that is a big ask actually. There is no reason at all for this move to be hidden under the cloud of the Budget. It is not a budgetary matter. It is not a matter for urgency. It is actually in my view not a matter for confidence and supply. I think that the only reason it is being put through under Budget urgency is so that the three votes of the Māori Party could be attached to it. If this bill was amended as per my amendment to clause 2 we would be able to have that debate with the full scrutiny of members of the public and the 3800 families who are not given financial support under this legislation who are being denied it and who are also having the right to a Human Rights Review Tribunal denied.The way that the current commencement provision reads no such scrutiny is allowed. The bill having gone through all of its stages in one go with hardly a pause for breath let alone any fresh consideration will come into force on the day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent. I think that is a big mistake. It has been pointed out in many previous debates in this Parliament what happens when legislation is rushed. Almost without exception the Minister has to come back look embarrassed—even more embarrassed than currently—and ask for more time from Parliament to correct the mistakes.