Stewart Barbara: Child Support Amendment Bill (No 4) — Second Reading 
Stewart Barbara: Child Support Amendment Bill (No 4) — Second Reading 
[Volume:631;Page:3666] 
BARBARA STEWART (NZ First) 
: 
 On behalf of New Zealand First I rise to support the second reading of the Child Support Amendment Bill (No 4). One of the bill’s purposes as outlined in its introduction is to improve compliance with financial support obligations so that more children receive the financial support to which they are entitled. Of course this in turn reduces the State provision of financial support. This bill proposes writing off the debt penalties—not arrears—as a part incentive for parents to reactivate their payments. As outlined by the Minister it is only limited relief. As the chairperson of the Social Services Committee Georgina Beyer has pointed out the total penalties have exceeded arrears since September 2001. 
So action is really needed to encourage those lapsed parents to re-enter the system. It is far less expensive for New Zealand to write off the debt penalties than the arrears. The debt penalties are paper money at this point in time. Of course we all know here in this House that it is far better for people to pay their child support on time. We also know that it is only by bringing or trying to bring all of the non-payers into the actual system that their children will receive the financial support they are entitled to receive from their parents. There is no easy way to deal with this issue. We are very aware of that. We all know too that children are a parent’s responsibility. As Judith Collins pointed out children must come first. We totally agree with that sentiment. 
There is an obligation on members of Parliament to ensure that parents who should be contributing to their families and their children do actually contribute. This bill goes some way towards trying to do something about this situation. It has irked many members in this House for a long time and New Zealand First members are among them. 
We know that children and teenagers are expensive creatures to rear and to keep running. Meeting the needs of teenagers in today’s society to ensure that their overall well-being and self-esteem are intact so that they can interact with their peers to the best of their ability is really important. We want our children to be the best they can possibly be. As parents we all know that peer pressure to have the right clothes—particularly labelled clothes—to have a cellphone they can use and an iPod is pretty intense. It is really tough for teenagers when they cannot compete on an equal footing with their classmates. 
We all know that children can be really cruel to those who are not judged to be part of the crowd. As many members have pointed out Rodney Hide may not be considered to be part of the crowd with his  
Dancing with the Stars 
 performances. We in this House all know that children can be totally disadvantaged in both the short and the long term if they do not receive support particularly financial support from both their parents. It is really unfortunate that in these cases the children ultimately become the innocent victims. In New Zealand First we believe that when a mother names the father of her child or children except in exceptional circumstances the father should contribute to the lives of those children financially as well as emotionally or with his time. 
I will extend that to say that I think parents should contribute emotionally and I know how often parents contribute financially right throughout the lives of their children. Even then as parents—and many of us in this House would say this—we are never not responsible for our children no matter how old we are probably until the day our children become responsible for us in our old age in our rest home. 
It is essential that as far as possible a parent’s child support liability accurately reflects that parent’s ability to provide financial assistance for his or her children. We have all heard stories about this. We heard today another story whereby one of the liable parents has managed to put all of that parent’s assets in a trust so that by and large they are actually hidden. Of course these people pay far less than what they should pay. Unfortunately again it is the children who suffer—something that should not happen at all. 
 On the other hand I have heard of a liable mother who provides so much for her absent children that she is actually forced to live on the breadline. Unfortunately life would be easier for her if she were unemployed and on a benefit and paid only the bare minimum. But that is not the message we want to send to people and it is not what this mother wants to do. She is quite happy to look after her children to the best of her ability. 
It has also been suggested that there may be many more people than we know about who have absconded and are resident across the Tasman. If we can ensure that the numbers of people doing this can be significantly reduced or tracked down then that should be done. 
This bill is essentially about supporting children. We always say children are our future. They deserve the support of both their parents. This is a really serious and important issue and measures did need to be put in place. We condemn the Government when these measures are not put in place. New Zealand First supports this bill and believes that it goes some way towards meeting the needs of both the parents and the children in these particular cases.