Lees-Galloway Iain: Support for Children in Hardship Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLees-Galloway Iain: Support for Children in Hardship Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 01 December 2015. Volume:710;Page:8421. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North): I must respond to the previous contributor Stuart Smith who said something like Labour had 9 long years to do something about child poverty. Well Working for Families raised over 100000 children out of child poverty. The leader of the National Party John Key—I think he was the finance spokesperson at the time—called it “communism by stealth” and National voted against it. And of course Labour’s policy at the last election would have raised over 50000 more children out of poverty—far more significant than any aspect of this legislation.But let us look at Part 3 in particular because Part 3 deals with the family tax credit and the thresholds. By any measure the increases that are available to people under Part 3 just do not touch the sides—4000 families. Four thousand families so—what are we talking—8000 or maybe 10000 children at the most will be entitled to an extra $12 a week and that is at a cost to the Government of $1.8 million annually? This is a Government that is spending $26 million on a flag referendum and that gave $30 million to a foreign corporate—The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Come back.IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: —and its response in Part 3 of this legislation is to spend $1.8 million annually? So it will take at least 13 years for this measure to get on to a par with a flag referendum?The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Come back to Part 3.IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: That is not an adequate response to child poverty. It is rich for a member on the Government benches to get up and say that they are doing more than other parties have done when we have been in Government when that party in Opposition railed against measures that had a far more significant impact on child poverty and poverty in general than this legislation does.The increase of $12.50 that a handful of families is going to be entitled to under Part 3 is essentially an inflation adjustment. It is something that probably ought to be just built into the system anyway. It is not an increase in real terms. It is helping a handful of families to catch up with some of the increases in the cost of living. As I say it certainly will not touch the sides. The difference that this will make is utterly negligible. If I was one of the National members I would be ashamed to get up and speak in favour of these changes in the way that they have done because in real terms the difference that people are going to experience is utterly negligible. At best you could say it is assisting families to catch up with the cost of living over the last few years.Of course any change in the right direction is worth supporting but let us be honest about what this really is. The minimum family tax credit is highlighted with these changes and of course one of the big problems with the minimum family tax credit is that there are points where it has a nearly 100 percent effective marginal tax rate.I have said this before about other legislation relating to these issues: I would have thought that National would want to do more about marginal tax rates especially for people on the lowest incomes and especially for people who are trying to transition from benefit into work or who are trying to make work a larger proportion of the income that they receive.National rails against effective marginal tax rates for rich people but when it comes to these people the people who are trying to scrape by on the very least and in particular families—people who are trying to raise children on the very least—this Government shows again utter inaction.