9. Question No. 9—Social DevelopmentHon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō) to the Minister for Social DevelopmentQuestion No. 9—Social DevelopmentSPEAKER: Before the member asks her question I have been warned I think thrice that this is likely to be a longer than normal answer.9. Hon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō) to the Minister for Social Development: How many more children are living in hardship following an increase of 9000 people on benefits compared to one year ago?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development): Answering the member's question is problematic for a couple of reasons; however I'm going to try to answer her question as best I can. The recent Household Incomes in New Zealand report did not include low income and material hardship figures for children in 2016 and 2017 because of a sizable change in levels that the officials cannot fully explain even when the relatively small sample size of 3500 is taken into account. This makes it difficult to directly respond to the member's question.What I can tell the member is that as at December 2018 the number of dependent children of working-age people on main benefits were 180715. In December 2017 this figure was 178310 an increase of 2405. Through changes like the winter energy payment these families have been able to lift their incomes which is critical to lifting children out of hardship. Treasury projects that this Government's Families Package will lift tens of thousands of children out of poverty by 2021.However it is important that the member does not oversimplify hardship by confining it to beneficiary households. What we know from the Household Incomes in New Zealand report is that a sizable portion of poor children actually come from working families—it's estimated around four in 10. That's why this Government's commitment to raising incomes through increases in the minimum wage is also important in reducing the number of children living in hardship.Hon Louise Upston: Given her response about the number of children living in benefit-dependent homes not being the poorest what's her response to the Salvation Army State of the Nation Report released yesterday that states most children living in households receiving only a benefit are likely to be the poorest?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I wouldn't dispute that statement. In fact in my previous answer I said that four in 10 children living in households that are living in poverty are likely to be in households where someone is working. Four in 10 is not the majority; the other six in 10 yes are likely to be in beneficiary households.Hon Louise Upston: Why has the percentage of all children living in benefit-dependent homes increased under her watch when it had fallen steadily and consistently since 2013?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Can I just give some context to that. The unemployment rate at the moment is 4.3 percent. That's the second-lowest that it's been in the last 10 years. The lowest was actually the last quarter—both those figures under us. I've explained in the past that the dropping of the unemployment rate but the lifting of the numbers is largely due to population growth. As you can imagine when there is population growth with adults there's also population growth with the children in those households.Hon Louise Upston: Can the Minister explain what benefit numbers as a proportion of the working-age population means?Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: The benefit numbers as a proportion of the working-age population means exactly what the member has just said. It is the proportion of the population that are on benefits.