Edmonds BarbaraHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana): Thank you Madam Chair. I thought I'd be able to take a call to give the other side of the Chamber a bit of a hand in relation to the renaming of this bill. I think this bill should be called the Social Security Bringing More Kids into Poverty Amendment Bill". So to be able to assist in relation to that amendment I thought I would give the Chamber a bit of a history lesson around Working for Families. The actual Working for Families policy is around tax credits—they're tax transfers which are administered through Inland Revenue and provide different entitlements. When Working for Families came in under a Labour Government in 2005 it was a staged implementation process. So I think some of the commentary in the Chamber around it having to be 1 April—actually when Working for Families did come in in 2005 there was some October implementation dates around that. Working for Families just so the other side of the Chamber understands really helps people get into work. That's exactly why it's called Working for Families: it's to incentivise people to go back to work. The abatement threshold allows for—once you hit a particular rate of income then it basically starts to cut back on how much the Working for Families entitlement a particular family can get. I acknowledge the work by Ricardo Menéndez March today to be able to bring back some history to this Chamber. For me when I was a young mother going through university and at the time I had two children—Hon Nicola Willis: Still a young mother.Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: Thank you very much the Minister of Finance is saying I'm still a young mother—appreciate that compliment. I was going through university. My husband was in a low-paid labour job. He earned just above the minimum wage. We were getting family support. But then in 2004 when the Labour Government decided to bring in Working for Families we went from $8 in the hand at the end of the week—all our bills paid $8 in the hand to be able to help our children. We only had only two children at the time—Hon Rachel Brooking: Only two?Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: Only two and it was really difficult at the time. But then Working for Families came in and that $8 at the end of the week became just over $100. That is the implication of Working for Families. It actually really helps families come out of poverty and be able to give them opportunities. I am a living proof of that ability. It allowed my husband and our family to operate while I was studying my law degree. So the reason why I stand for this amendment—to rename it the "Social Security Bringing More Kids into Poverty Amendment Bill"—is because this particular bill removes the ability and changes the way in which benefits are basically raised. There is official advice that has been received. I know members have gone through this in both Part 1 and Part 2. But I want to just remind members that this bill will impact on children. We all have a responsibility in this Chamber to those children of the lowest-paid families families both on benefits and entitlements those who are working who are trying hard to get ahead. We've got to come back to the reason why this side of the Chamber opposes this bill and why this side of the Chamber absolutely believes that this bill should be renamed as getting children back into poverty."