Guy Nathan: New Zealand Superannuation and Veterans' Pensions (Entitlements of Spouses and Partners of People in Long-term Residential Care and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Guy Nathan: New Zealand Superannuation and Veterans' Pensions (Entitlements of Spouses and Partners of People in Long-term Residential Care and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:631;Page:3519] 
NATHAN GUY (National) 
: 
 I rise to talk to Part 2 of the bill. In particular I want to talk about the removal of the reference to shared household expenses. 
Lindsay Tisch 
: That’s a good point. 
NATHAN GUY 
: It is a very important point because removing this provision is extremely important for those elderly couples one of whom is living alone who have been struggling as costs continue to increase. Removing the reference to sharing household expenses in terms of the living alone payment will increase it for those single people by $20 a week. The projected cost is only $135000 in 2006 moving out to $150000 in 2008. 
The significant issue I believe is around the submission received from Age Concern New Zealand which stated: “While we acknowledge the proposed amendments through the bill improve the situation and make it fairer the changes do not address the fundamental issue which is that many older people currently do not receive adequate financial assistance from the Government to ensure that poverty does not predetermine their health and well-being.” We have seen interest-free student loans and Working for Families happen and the elderly over-65 superannuitants and the war pensioners have just been forgotten. This bill is finally progressing through the House now after 6 long years of National supporting it. It has taken 6 long years for this Government to get the bill to the House. 
I also touch on the voluntary work overseas of the Volunteer Service Abroad people who do a fantastic job. There are about 40 of them I believe who work overseas and do a fantastic job— 
Marian Hobbs 
: Why are you quibbling then about extending it to 3 years? 
NATHAN GUY 
: We have been waiting for the Minister in the chair the Hon Ruth Dyson to take a call on this issue because we are unsure about it. The Minister has been silent on this issue I say to Ms Hobbs. We have been trying to understand and get the Minister to talk a call as to why it has increased to 3 years. Submitters were happy for it to be extended from 52 weeks out to 104; instead it is going out to 3 years. We would like the Minister to take a call so that we can understand exactly why that is so. The projected cost—about $266000 in 2006 moving out to about $300000 in 2008—is fantastic but we are still unsure why on earth the Government has chosen to move it out to 3 years when submitters came in and made submissions on extending it out to 2 years. We are still waiting for the Minister to take a call on that. 
This bill will allow about 2000 eligible people to age with dignity. It is great that the member for East Coast Ms Tolley has outlined some of the grey areas such as whether the residential home can be a granny flat. I heard her mention it could even be a caravan or a boat moored in seas within the New Zealand jurisdiction. This bill has taken 6 long years but finally it is here. National is here to support it after the good work that the honourable member from Nelson has done and the many other National Party colleagues who have spoken here tonight.