Upston LouiseHon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō): Thank you Mr Speaker. I'm very pleased to take a call on behalf of the National Party in this third and final reading of the Social Security (Financial Assistance for Caregivers) Amendment Bill.If we look back over the years not just of the immediately preceding Government but the ones before that there's been a significant programme of work to support children who are either in State care or who are cared for for a variety of reasons by people other than their parents. So it is good to see that this work has continued and has transferred from multiple Ministers including my former colleagues Anne Tolley and this particular piece of work from the Hon Tracey Martin and now in the name of the Hon Kelvin Davis.For those who were able to listen to the debate in the second reading I think they would have been reassured by the speeches that took place in this House and the very real understanding of what needs to occur in terms of caregivers who look after children and we heard very personal examples of that both from caregivers—and we also are aware of those in our House who have been supported by caregivers who weren't their own parents. As we traversed this there were a number of issues that did come up. As the Minister said this is only a small piece of a wider programme of work and I think anyone on the Social Services and Community Committee would agree there is further work to be done. One of the issues that's addressed with this bill is the time frames. There was previously a restriction in terms of not being able to access this financial support for caregivers within 12 months. Unfortunately what we do know is that that first period of time is potentially the most traumatic for a child and to be away from their parents for whatever reason and to then get the double kind of hit if you like of caregivers who are financially struggling just with the practicalities of a new child coming into their household shouldn't be an issue that that new family faces. So we do think it's sensible. One of the points that I raised that I think was misunderstood in one of the earlier readings was also the fact that successive Governments have made a real effort to try and find ways to reduce the number of moves that children have who are not with their parents or who are in State care. This doesn't necessarily remove that. But what it does do is when that child has moved into the family environment of this caregiver it actually enables support to get to them directly. One of the issues that did come up that was raised by the Green member of Parliament in a Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) that was defeated—in fact we voted it down—I do think requires further attention because it's potentially also a barrier to caregivers accessing support. And while I might not go as far as my Green parliamentary colleague wishes to go I do think that it is an area that needs due consideration. So I'm pleased that the SOP was put on the Table because often the reason for a child requiring time with parents who aren't theirs can be complicated. And again I think if the intent is how we are ensuring that the financial support goes to the family that's looking after the child without too many unnecessary barriers—clearly there need to be some clear reasons as to why it might not be immediate. But the other thing that I do think is important—and I do implore the Minister to consider—that I raised in my first reading speech is there will be some families who take on the responsibility of children who need a hell of a lot more financial support. I'd like to see that there could be a way for those children and those families to get a greater level of support that is very targeted in supporting their specific family's needs. I think this is not an area by any stretch of the imagination that you can have a one-size-fits-all approach. So I do request that the Minister consider a more targeted approach a more flexible approach a way that is far more able to ensure the child or children that are placed into a different whānau or household can be supported in the ways that their needs are met. Yes some of that's financial but some of it's logistical; there'll be a much wider range. I do want to take the opportunity in this third reading while we are supporting this legislation obviously to signal some of the areas of further work that we would like considered. Part of that was also around the name of the orphan's benefit which has come up in a number of readings. Most people would assume that if someone's receiving an orphan's benefit the parents of the child involved are deceased and that's often not the case. And again if we have in our mind the objective of providing the most support for that child and reducing the harm involved in being separated for a period of time from the parents then I think this is another issue that can be addressed. Some of the allowances in terms of renaming Christmas allowance" to "holiday allowance" and actually getting financial support for that and birthdays is a no-brainer. We want to make sure that these children who are precious children and who have additional challenges are given as many opportunities as possible to live a normal and fulfilling life. It's our duty and responsibility as lawmakers to make that as easy as possible. Thank you Mr Speaker."