Heatley Phil: Social Security (Benefit Categories and Work Focus) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Heatley Phil: Social Security (Benefit Categories and Work Focus) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 26 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8942. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) 
: 
 I would like to bring Parliament back to some key facts around the Social Security (Benefit Categories and Work Focus) Amendment Bill in regard to the commencement date and the title. The Labour Party members have enjoyed a little bit of getting out their rhetoric which we are so familiar with. I would like to bring the Committee of the whole House back to some key facts. First of all regarding the commencement date it is very important that we make it clear that there are two commencement dates here of import. The first date is a key one—15 July 2013—for most of the changes in the bill such as the transfer to the three new benefit categories and the introductions of new obligations and expectations. So that is 15 July 2013. This date gives sufficient time for transition purposes to ensure that the Ministry of Social Development’s systems—IT systems—and payment staff are ready for the changes. So that is a key date to note. 
The second commencement date of course is the day after the date on which the bill receives the Royal assent. This is for two transitional purposes: so that certain people aged 65 years or older can be transitioned to an emergency benefit and so that the disability allowance can be used to fund specified expenses and the preferred suppliers of goods or services for beneficiaries. So those people listening who are interested or who are directly affected do need to know the importance of those two dates. 
Moving to the title Social Security (Benefit Categories and Work Focus) Amendment Bill I would like to repeat what the Minister for Social Development said today in press releases and that is just to clarify some of the rhetoric that is out on the airwaves that the Labour Party and its good friends the unions are pushing. What the Minister says—and this how you melt down this bill to the most simple form—is quite simply that all we are asking for all New Zealanders are asking for all Kiwis are asking for is that people need to be available to work. If they are genuinely in a situation where they cannot find work that is OK. We will support them. 
However the National Party and our support parties are with the majority of New Zealanders who do not believe that we should be funding people to smoke dope. We do not think that we should be funding people to run away from the police and commit crimes. We do not believe that we should be funding people to commit fraud. There is a small proportion of those on a benefit who do smoke dope and employers will tell you that they turn up for jobs and do not pass tests. There are those people who used to be funded to run away from the law after committing crimes—they would still receive a benefit. There are those people who do refuse to work and we want to hold them to account. 
The Labour Party could never have a bill that had within the title the term “Work Focus”. The Labour Party could never do that. I think New Zealanders on the whole who are listening to the debate tonight instinctively know that the Labour Party would not get under control the whole welfare system. I look at the record. Labour shifted beneficiaries between different types of benefits when it was in Government. It did not shift people into work when it was in Government; it simply shifted them on to other benefits. For example the sickness benefit numbers under the Labour Government went from 33000 in 1999 to 46000 in 2008. In the time Labour was in Government there were 33000 people on the sickness benefit and it went to 46000 people. And that was during good international economic times. So either the Labour Government was lax in getting people into work or people were sicker under Labour. You make the choice. 
The invalids benefit numbers increased from 53000 to 85000. Labour abolished compulsory budgeting advice. Labour continued paying benefits to criminals on the run from police. How do listeners feel about that? The Labour Party which has been appealing to listeners all night essentially continued paying benefits to people on the run from police. I mean really! Who at home supports that? Labour allowed recreational drug users—