O'Connor SimonSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): Thank you very much Mr Chair. Very pleased to take a call the first of several I suspect because while it's a small bill per say it's actually touching on something substantial. But pleased to talk first and foremost conceptually because I think it's actually a good bill but also in support of my colleague Hamish Walker. He's one of the real hard workers of this Parliament and working I think on the right response to need. We can often get some frivolous bills coming through this Parliament—member or Government—and actually this is really really important.So I suppose I want to direct initially my comments around the intentions and trying to hopefully with the assistance of the member in the chair—or have I just misled the committee in some way I don't know.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): The member in the chair shouldn't leave the chair. We'll put it down to a first term.SIMON O'CONNOR: As a courtesy I'll wait for him to return if that's OK. I think that actually illustrates the hardworking member as he continues to serve the good of this House. I suppose the question I have for the member in the chair is really trying to get my head around where his initial intention started and to where the bill as it now sits has landed. So fundamentally we had a bill which was to provide empowerment to foster carers. But through a series of acrobatic flips we now end up with the amended bill basically returning as I understand things—and I suppose I'd like to be corrected early on if I have this wrong—the powers of this bill back to things that already were. In other words in some ways is the current bill—before we get on to the matter of the Supplementary Order Paper (SOP)—really affecting no change? So my understanding—and the member in the chair will I'm sure happily correct me or his adviser—is that we have a situation currently where foster parents cannot open on behalf of their foster child a KiwiSaver account. They've always had to go to the legal guardian of what once would've been called Child Youth and Family Services now Oranga Tamariki. That in fact this bill as currently amended and as we're discussing in the committee of the whole House has really just bought it straight back to the guardianship and is precluding and continuing to preclude foster parents. So in fact the initial intention of the bill at this point has been defeated. Therefore we must and have to I think as a House—if we're going to respect the member and his intention—bring forward SOP 258 in the name of Hamish Walker which does make it very very clear that a foster parent can actually undertake this.I know there have been objections of short-term care by a foster parent. I would probably make the argument that that sometimes is sort of the nature of fostering actually. Then because of the very nature of fostering to still stop and not allow a young person to have access—that's a little odd. I suppose the first fundamental question to the member is: has the intention of his bill as amended through the select committee and as we discuss it here in Chamber been circumvented? The second is around just the nomenclature just the change of names. It's a small technical question. I can see that the suggestion is now to call it Oranga Tamariki Guardians". I suppose my simple question to the member is: if we are to agree to this and granted it will come through in clause 1 discussion and if we need to amend it in the future is it going to require a legislative instrument? And why I say that is we've obviously got history in this House where we've moved from Child Youth and Family to Oranga Tamariki. We obviously know there are some issues around Oranga Tamariki at the moment. I'm not presuming in this committee that there is going to be immediate change but I just want to understand whether there will be any changes there.The other question that I have at this stage is: has he consulted in any way around the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act issues? Again we are dealing with young people and I suppose if there is a question around who can open the account is there a fundamental right of the child to have an account? So at the moment if I've read the bill correctly—and through the select committee there's been a lot of discussion around who can open the account and why or why not. But actually if we are to reverse the process—and again I put it to the member to consider it as the right of the child—then the nature of rights implies duties and obligations. In other words if the child of a certain age has the right to a KiwiSaver account then it must follow logically and legally that we as the Parliament have a right and obligation to bring this about. So I will just leave that there at this time."