Woods Megan: Social Security (Commencement of Benefits) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWoods Megan: Social Security (Commencement of Benefits) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 17 November 2015. Volume:710;Page:8222. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram): I am very happy to take a call on the Social Security (Commencement of Benefits) Amendment Bill and to put some further questions to the Minister in the chair the Hon Nathan Guy because we have been putting these questions but still do not have any answers. In the course of my contribution on this bill I want to share some of the questions that I have been asked by my constituents in Wigram and share some of the stories from there.I would like to echo the questions that my colleague Su’a William Sio just asked around what the numbers are that we are talking about here. We were told by the Minister for Social Development who was previously in the chair that we have so far had 8500 claims made since this has gone public but how much are they for what brackets do they fit into and what kind of quantum are we talking about here? That is a question that is really important to us here on the Opposition benches in order for us to understand the impact of this legislation. The Minister is dismissing it and saying that it is only 1 day but as my colleague quite rightly pointed out if it is only 1 day and it is such a small thing what is the problem? Why are Government members not looking to support Carmel Sepuloni’s Supplementary Order Paper 142 which would allow for natural justice to occur?We also have a very big question around why we are doing this under urgency. The fact is that this was found out in May 2014—there was a High Court ruling—so why is it that we are here in November 2015 pushing this through under urgency and in real danger of making the same kinds of mistakes that got us into this place in the first place? My colleague Grant Robertson read very well from the Hansard of the debates of 1998 which showed just how we got into this predicament—sloppy lawmaking under urgency when we do not use all the tools at our disposal as legislators to examine legislation and ask the kinds of questions that we need to ask.Given that we do not have that opportunity for the select committee process and we do not have that opportunity for people to come and make submissions I would like to share some of the feedback I have been getting from constituents in Wigram. A group of constituents—I have had a lot of traffic into my office in Hoon Hay—are actually a group of teacher-aides. This is a group of workers many of whom stand down each term. So when the Minister says that this is 1 day only that is many days multiplied by the end of term. So for her to dismiss it as being just 1 day shows the Minister does not understand the problem.This is a group of workers—teacher-aides—who are reasonably low-paid. They work incredibly hard and make an incredible difference in our schools but these are largely women who when they stand down need to reapply for the benefit to support their families. This is a group of mothers who often struggle who have been denied assistance with raising their children—because let us be clear this is what they were entitled to. This is not people here seeking something that was not theirs; this is about asking that people be paid what they were rightfully entitled to.Something I have noted is that a number of the people who have come into my office to talk about this and who are employed as teacher-aides are actually people whom I have had to help with Novopay issues. This is a group of workers who have already had to deal with the Ministry of Education not being able to get their pay right in the Novopay debacle and now they are having to deal with another Government agency denying them what was rightfully theirs.I think this is a very unfairly treated group of workers and I would like to know from the Minister in the chair Nathan Guy how many of the 8500 are teacher-aides—another question. We would like to see you get on your feet Minister and answer some of these questions that we are putting to you. This is being done under urgency and there are real questions that the Opposition is putting to the Minister and we believe that they deserve to be answered. So for the Minister to just sit there and do his paperwork and not take a call and answer these questions it really is not giving the dignity to this legislation that it deserves. I would like to know how many of the 8500 who have already made a claim under this provision are from this group whom I have described—teacher-aides. How many days were these workers affected for? When the Minister says that it is just 1 day I know that many of the women whom I have spoken to have had a stand down every term. If you put that back—they have been doing this since 1998—that is many terms. That is many days of entitlement that they have been denied.So I look forward to the Minister taking a calling on that. I look forward to the Minister explaining to us why this is being done in urgency. I look forward to the Minister describing to us how many of the 8500 fall into what brackets and what the actual liability on the Crown is.