Chhour KarenKAREN CHHOUR (ACT): I rise today in opposition to the Income Insurance Scheme (Enabling Development) Bill. There are a couple of things I'm concerned about and one of them is the use of urgency. When I first arrived in Parliament and we were having a discussion around what urgency actually was I was assured that urgency is not something that happens often here—so it must be for something really important. Since I've been here urgency seems to happen all the time. We seem to have forgotten that for making good public policy it matters that we have good consultation. It matters that we listen to the public's concerns and when we're in urgency we skip that process.As representatives of New Zealand and as representatives of the people of New Zealand surely listening to their concerns and listening to their voices is the most important part of our job and it seems that we keep skipping that over and over and over again in this House. I find it quite insulting that we are debating this in urgency when New Zealanders are struggling to feed their families right now. We should be debating right now how we can make immediate changes to help New Zealanders have more money in their back pocket so they can feed their children and $350 is an insult—an absolute insult. It's a dollar a day. How will you feed your children on a dollar a day and how was that even targeted and how are these bills going to make immediate changes when our communities are crying out for help?People that have never asked for help are now asking for help. Have we forgotten that we're in the middle of an economic crisis as we're debating a bill that's going to enable this Government to take more money off the people who are struggling to pay for food for their families? They already can't afford to feed their families and this bill will enable the Government to take another thousand dollars a year if it goes through. You say you care and you're going to give them $350 but you'll take a thousand away if this goes through—and I'd like to repeat that this bill is a framework for an if". Why are we spending money on an "if" bill when we could be putting more money into what we need right now?ACT wants to have the best public policy in the world and the only way we can do that is if we consult with the people we work for—the New Zealanders who pay the taxes that pay our wages to stand here and debate things like this. When we avoid consultation and we do things under urgency so often here we are losing the voice of the people. This bill is an "if" bill but when you look at what they are thinking about doing it is just going to add extra costs to the pockets of New Zealanders. It's going to add extra costs to small business and it's not going to be any immediate help for the cost of living crisis we are suffering from right now. We've added so many costs over the last few years on to small business on to taxpayers and we can't keep doing this. Inflation is going to be around for a long time and that is what we should be debating in this House under urgency—if you're going to have urgency. We should be debating how we are going to immediately help people put more money in their back pocket right now so they can feed their families. That is why I stand here and oppose this bill."