Beaumont Carol: Members of Parliament (Remuneration and Services) Bill — Second ReadingText is subject to correctionBeaumont Carol: Members of Parliament (Remuneration and Services) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 22 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:14082. Text is subject to correction.]CAROL BEAUMONT (Labour): It is a pleasure to rise and speak on the second reading of the Members of Parliament (Remuneration and Services) Bill. Obviously a number of people have referred to the work of the Government Administration Committee on this bill and to the way that the select committee members worked together. I too would like to acknowledge the chair of that select committee the Hon Ruth Dyson who I think is well known as an extremely good chair. The Government Administration Committee received and considered 18 submissions from interested groups and individuals and heard seven submissions. The bill we are now debating is of course strengthened by the submissions and contributions of those people.This bill seeks to establish a new framework for setting entitlements for members of Parliament. It is a bill that has four main parts to it and considers a range of elements. Part 1 is just the preliminary provisions. We then go through from there to salaries and allowances of members of Parliament. Just to be crystal clear this is not about what members of Parliament are getting; this is about the how—how these matters are set. Part 3 is around services and Part 4 is around the entitlements of former members and miscellaneous matters.I think one of the important factors to note is that this bill in seeking to set up that new framework is implementing subject to some modifications most of the recommendations of the Law Commission’s reportReview of the Civil List Act 1979—Members of Parliament and Ministers. Essentially the bill is recommending that the Remuneration Authority should determine accommodation services to members travel services to members’ families and resolution of issues about these services and the ongoing travel entitlements of former members. Those are currently determined by the Speaker of the House of Representatives or the Minister responsible for Ministerial Services.The important point here is that moving those things to the Remuneration Authority is really part of a process of increasing transparency and clarity and also I guess of managing the competing interests of ensuring that members of Parliament are properly supported in carrying out their functions but also maintaining confidence in the integrity of Parliament. That balance is really important. All of us in this Chamber will know that members of Parliament are not universally well regarded by the public and that many people consider that we have many flaws and that we are probably overpaid for not doing a job well.We know that members of Parliament generally—and I would say across the House—enter this place for the right reasons. They want to make a difference want to represent New Zealanders and want to help change things and scrutinise things in the right manner. Clearly members of Parliament need to be adequately resourced to do that job and have the services that they need to be able to do that work. As the Hon Ruth Dyson outlined when she was talking about travel provisions the fact of that matter is that it is not just about coming from your home town to this place in Wellington and being here in the debating chamber and then going back. Doing the job properly requires members of Parliament to have the ability to travel where New Zealanders are and to fulfil their responsibilities in terms of portfolio responsibilities. For example the Hon Ruth Dyson was talking about her commitment to—I think it was—Grey Power and then finding out how many locations around New Zealand that they were in. Likewise—and I am sure that others could identify examples—the ability to do the job is the ability to talk to relevant people wherever they are in New Zealand. In my own case I have been talking to budget services up and down New Zealand about what they are seeing New Zealanders experiencing the difficulties that they are having and the level of debt that they are carrying. It is important to look at that from the point of view of different places within this country. So it is a part of doing the job to be able to dothat. It is certainly not a perk. I just want to emphasise again though that this bill is about how these matters are sorted and set rather than the what.I do want to comment on two things in particular. As I have said the bill is about increasing the transparency and clarity of the requirements for reporting members’ and former members’ entitlements to travel and accommodation services and of the provision of members’ superannuation. We must be transparent. We must be clear about what those things are and willing and able to confidently assert those to the public and for the public to see that they have been set in a reasonable and independent manner independent from ourselves.The other matter that I particularly wanted to identify was the support for members with physical or sensory impairments. I think this is a really positive step forward for this Parliament. In doing this we are providing for entitlements to services to be determined in a way that takes into account the particular requirements of members with physical or sensory impairments. At this point I want to acknowledge the Green MP Mojo Mathers for her role in ensuring that these matters have really come to be seen as important and that they require dealing with. This bill is part of that. We need to ensure that this House is truly representative and that any member of Parliament who is here has the right support and the ability to do their job of representing New Zealanders and I think that it is a very positive thing indeed that the provisions have been made within this bill.I would also just note that I think this was done in a reasonably cross-party manner as well. This is separate from this bill but I just comment that recently work was done around the needs of members of Parliament with family responsibilities and I recently saw an article about Holly Walker and her baby. I guess that while I am talking about Holly I will congratulate her on that. I acknowledge that she is getting leave to look after her new baby which I think is a very positive thing indeed. We want to ensure—Hon Trevor Mallard: The baby frequents thePētone cafes.CAROL BEAUMONT: The baby frequents cafes? At such a young age too. But it is positive that we can ensure that this place is truly representative and the fact that people can come into Parliament and you know have their families and still do their job is a positive thing and one that should be acknowledged. As I have said members of Parliament with physical or sensory impairments as is provided for in this bill are also able to come to this House and do their job.I think that we sought—and the select committee worked hard on this I understand—to ensure that the bill does achieve that appropriate balance between the interests of ensuring that members do get properly supported in carrying out their roles and functions and maintaining the confidence of Parliament on the other hand. Moving many of the matters to the Remuneration Authority which is independent from members of Parliament rather than having matters be determined primarily by the Speaker of the House of Representatives or the Minister responsible for Ministerial Services has I believe improved that. With that I would like to commend this bill to the House.