Sharples Pita: Social Security Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Sharples Pita: Social Security Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:636;Page:7204] 
Dr PITA SHARPLES (Co-Leader—Maori Party) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Assistant Speaker. The Social Security Amendment Bill has at its core a move by the Government to focus on beneficiaries by claiming the value—the absolute necessity—of people participating in the labour market and engaging in work as an appropriate outcome. At the same time the bill states that the Government will continue to provide social and financial support for people with temporary or long-term barriers to work. It also appears to have as a consequential outcome a greater involvement by the State in the lives of vulnerable people. It does this under the guise of creating a more efficient support system to enable them to receive that to which they are entitled. We are very concerned about the increased surveillance of particular groups by the State in the face of increased freedom for others. 
The bill contains a second clever move by the Government. In focusing on encouraging people to think of work—something the Maori Party would support—a critical question is not asked: what sort of work are we talking about? Is it the sort of work where people have to aspire to succeed in a low-wage economy where people shift their sights from the peaks of the beneficiary mountain to the peaks of the mountains of the working poor? This is the working poor that the Minister of Maori Affairs frequently refers to as a positive outcome—the part-time the seasonal the low-paid workers and the poor work conditions. “Get a job.” replaces “Have a life.” 
What this bill and many others introduced by the Government fails to acknowledge is that every aspect of the economy is interrelated. On the one hand we sit by in this House today and watch $95.7 million being spent on reforming the social support system to supposedly create a work-focused system and on the other hand we close our eyes to the fact that not one cent will go towards the creation of jobs that people want to get out of bed for—not one cent to enable the establishment of meaningful adequately paid secure employment. 
This House must be alert to the fact that changes made in one area inevitably impact on others. The social security system is linked to the wage rates is linked to tax exemptions is linked to capital gains and is linked to foreign exchange earnings. Not only do we have this Social Security Amendment Bill but yesterday we also had the first reading of the Appropriation (2005/06 Financial Review) Bill and last evening the Taxation (Annual Rates Savings Investment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill was sped through under urgency. All these bills are related. They are all part of the whakapapa—the genealogy—of economics. Our question asks whose whakapapa it is. 
Members should not get me wrong: we believe in the necessity of the safety net of the social security system with its honourable intentions. We believe that it is right and proper that the State supports our most vulnerable citizens to ensure that all New Zealanders have the right to enjoy quality of life. But unfortunately for too many of us it has had negative consequences in that people have become entangled in that safety net. For some families that entanglement is now seen to be normal—indeed almost a right. We in the Maori Party say that nobody has the right to be entangled in the welfare net of dependency or to see the entanglement as a right. And no society or Government has the right to promote such a view. 
We need to have a very good look at what we are doing here. What has happened here in Aotearoa to our people who are the constituents is no different from what has happened to other indigenous people where the safety net has become a welfare trap. As a result people have become alienated from contributing positively to their own economic health wealth and development. The values of the “I” and the “me” society have corrupted our traditional obligations to share resources and care. Is it the case in some families that our traditional values of sharing and caring become interpreted as “buying the booze for our teenagers” “sharing the joint” or “partying with the cuzzies” while the little ones are left to fend for themselves? This is an absolute corruption of what we for so long have considered to be our taonga tuku iho—those treasures handed down. This bill does nothing to address that situation. 
We in the Maori Party have an acute interest in and a commitment to having our people actively involved in the real economy and being positive contributors to it rather than being passive recipients and beneficiaries of the welfare State. 
We will support this bill going to the Social Services Committee but we say to the House that the debate on this bill is just as much about economic philosophy and direction as it is about social development and direction. The simple fact of the matter is that every economic relationship is also a social relationship and we cannot continue to have the silo mentality of divorcing one from the other. Tena tatou.