McKelvie IanIAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei): Just about missed it Madam Speaker.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): I did.IAN McKELVIE: The contribution of the last speaker was so substantial that I missed that too!I want to acknowledge the Minister of Local Government Nanaia Mahuta. She's been around local government long enough to know that people in this building should never annoy the people that are out there doing the work. And I think she's quite right in that respect because local government is a tricky business and the big difference between local government and this form of Government is that local government set the rates and collect the rates and everybody knows what they're paying. So when you're out there as a local government politician you front up to everybody that goes past you whether you like it or not and you get the blame for everything that happens. In here we kind of have tax bills that go through here on a weekly basis almost certainly on a monthly basis. We set the taxes and we never get the blame for it So the big difference between local government and national Government is that local government politicians are accountable for every step they make; we don't seem to be until the end of the three-year term when we are certainly accountable for some of the things we have or have not doneAnyway that wasn't my point. I also like one or two other speakers was not on the Social Services and Community Committee at the time this bill came through but I have been around local government long enough to have a fairly good understanding of rates rebates. Whilst we don't support this bill I do have a great deal of sympathy for those people who collect a rates rebate. I think it's an essential part of what we do. Whether it's the right way to deliver these things or not is an argument for another day. This argument that we're having today is all about how we deliver the rates rebate and what the best form of delivering it is. I'm going to point out some of the anomalies in the Rates Rebate Scheme in a moment but one of the interesting things about our councils and how they've evolved over the years is that almost every council—in fact all of my councils but one in my electorate—has a JP sitting in the office most days of the week and some at some time. So the current form of acquiring a rates rebate isn't that complicated and I tend to agree with one or two of the previous speakers who think we are spending a bit of time down here on a Friday debating a bill that probably isn't entirely necessary. However the point I want to make about the Rates Rebate Scheme is that it's all very well for those people who live in their own house and pay their own bill but many of our superannuitants in New Zealand—and there are various reasons for it a lot of them legislative—don't actually live in their own house but do pay the costs of living in that house. That's where this rates rebate scheme is very challenging. Because if they live in a house that's either provided for them by family members or provided for them by a trust and they have an agreement to pay the costs of the operation of that premises they don't qualify for the Rates Rebate Scheme. And through our electoral offices—I'm sure all of us will get inquiries of this nature—I've had a number of inquiries in my time in this place from people who are ineligible for the Rates Rebate Scheme for varying reasons and the reasons often relate to the way they occupy the premises they live in. So there are some anomalies in this scheme which I think are not ideal. Not everyone is treated the same. What I noticed and I spent a bit of time in local government—and the other thing you can do in local government which is actually quite a good idea if you really want to find out what the constituents think you go and sit out in the council office or the foyer of it on a rates payment day. You'll get a bit of feedback then. A lot of politicians wouldn't like to do that of course because it would make you a bit nervous. But now of course with the way we're changing society and the way we're changing the way we do things people don't go to the council office as often as they used to. They don't turn up at the building and pay their rates as they have done. I've even had a constituent who brought the cash into my office to give it to me to pay the council rates because they're either not able to go into the council building or they've been banned from it for some reason or other or whatever. So you get all forms of methods of paying rates and people are I guess to some extent intimidated by the fact that they've got to go and pay their rates or they do go to pay the rates. They're also intimidated by the fact that they have to acquire or fill out a form in order to get a rates rebate. So often they will need assistance to do that and in my experience of JPs' work JPs are always friendly and offer to assist in any way they are legally able to. So I think that probably the need for this bill is minimal to say the least. So I don't think there's a great deal of need for it. I just want to talk about one or two other things in respect to this bill as well. Of course if we lived in a perfect world we wouldn't need a rates rebate scheme because everyone would be paid adequately to pay the bills they need to pay and get on with life. We don't live in a perfect world unfortunately and that's just one of those things that happens to us.I want to talk about just one other issue which I'm very opposed to because I just don't like the system. It relates to the kind of—and there'll be some terminology for it that I won't use but it's a little bit like reverse mortgages where you effectively drip-up your house on the basis of paying the bills you need to pay to live. I'm definitely violently opposed to that sort of proposal. I think that type of thing diminishes people's ability to understand where they sit in life basically because what it does is it creeps up from behind you. You don't know it's coming and nowadays when I was born you got to 65 and you thought well that probably will be my lot. I didn't think that and I'm past that now. The problem is you then get to 69 or 70 and think God I might have 20 years left yet and I've got no money to keep me going." That's the very reason I'm opposed to this type of situation because when you get that stuff creeping up on you and you go on and on and on living and you keep on living and suddenly you've got to the point where you've actually got nothing left—you've got no equity left in your property or your life. The world changes so quickly and I think it's a very dangerous situation—a very dangerous situation—to get into and it's one that I don't like. [Interruption] Yeah I should be at the beach. You're right Hamish. I'd be a lot better off there.But I do think we've got to be careful when we put legislation of any sort in place that we think about what happens as people's circumstances change as we live longer and as the world rolls on. So we are opposed to this Rates Rebate (Statutory Declarations) Amendment Bill for a number of reasons. One of them is that we don't necessarily on this side of the House think it's the most appropriate system and I'm not sure there's a better system frankly. I don't know how you would deal with the issue that the Rates Rebate Scheme is designed to deal with in a better manner than we are dealing with it at the moment. Now the argument we've got of course is that this bill changes the way you make an application for that rates rebate scheme. In fact it could become more onerous because if you've got to start providing your IRD number and then the IRD starts to check the facts against your IRD number there could well be much more expense than there is in what goes on now. I don't know whether that will happen or not because the moment you put your IRD number on something and if the Secretary for Local Government then gave the IRD the opportunity or the ability to check that or this Parliament did through legislation it may well become a much more expensive and more cumbersome scheme to operate than it is now.I think Madam Speaker you yourself brought a rates bill to Parliament as a member's bill not that long ago which enabled some of our older members of our society to claim rates rebates back on I guess what could be called body corporate properties. That's probably not quite the word but something like that. So that's another issue that's been through this Parliament in recent times.Anyway I am standing as a National Party member of Parliament and we certainly are not supporting this bill. Thank you."