Bridges Simon: Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Bridges Simon: Student Loan Scheme Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:678;Page:1319] 
SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga) 
: 
 Like the member who has just taken his seat Grant Robertson I went through university in what some might consider the bad old days of interest on student loans—it was not ruthless it was “Ruthanomics”. I worked three part-time jobs: I waited tables I put books on shelves and I worked at Te Atatu South Foodtown and I paid my loan back. 
Grant Robertson 
: Did you walk barefoot? 
SIMON BRIDGES 
: I walked over hot coals and broken glass to get to university. I lived in a hut made of stone. But they were not the bad old days; they were the good old days because they gave me the moral fibre that I now have. We are of course keeping the interest-free component because contrary to basically everything that the members opposite have said actually we want to see people in universities and polytechnics and wananga.  
I have to say that despite all that heat and light we just heard from Grant Robertson this bill proceeded through the Finance and Expenditure Committee very peacefully and that is because what we are doing makes sense. It is common-sense stuff and it really is about just putting back a bit more personal responsibility into the student loan regime so that the students of today do have a little bit of moral fibre.  
The bill does three things. Let me just canvass them very very briefly. Firstly repayment holidays go from 3 years to 1 year. I think that just emphasises that a repayment holiday when you are off in London or New York or Sydney—wherever it may be doing whatever you are doing—is a privilege and not a right. It is not something tradesmen get when they buy something on hire purchase from Noel Leeming or anywhere else. They do not get a repayment holiday. I think it is right that we do have one but we are shortening it from 3 years to 1 year and I agree with that.  
We are also requiring borrowers to make clear a contact person. They must have a contact person. Be very clear there is no requirement on the contact person to have to front up. There are no penalties on the contact person but there must be one. I can understand members asking what the point is. Actually it is quite clear that by having that there we will see repayments. There is a level of accountability and we believe that will make a difference.  
Finally we are excluding investment and business losses from the calculation of net income of borrowers in assessing student loan repayments. That just brings an element of consistency here and it will raise some money.  
Mr Robertson asks what the point of this bill is. He says it is just tinkering. Actually this bill alone will raise an additional $14 million conservatively speaking. But even more important are the behavioural changes that it will make for those who decide to take out a student loan. When they finish and they get around to repaying those loans we want them to do it quicker. We want them to have greater personal responsibility. So this is a very good bill which members of the select committee worked cooperatively on and I am proud to stand and support it.