Lotu-Iiga Sam: Child Support Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Lotu-Iiga Sam: Child Support Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 26 February 2013. Volume:687;Page:8183. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 It is a privilege for me to stand and speak on this second reading of the Child Support Amendment Bill. As chair of the Social Services Committee which oversaw the work on this bill may I thank the Minister of Revenue Peter Dunne for the hard work that he has put in and for the constructive assistance that he gave to our committee and also our committee members. Although some here today are voting against the proposed legislation like the previous speaker Rajen Prasad I think it would be fair to say that all members of our committee agreed that the current legislation on the books is outdated and that it required reform and that is why this bill has come before the House. 
One of the Government’s key social objectives is to ensure that New Zealanders have an equal opportunity to take part in and contribute to our society. That includes providing a safety net through which the benefit system is working for those who are unable for various reasons to support themselves. But this is not a welfare bill per se. This is a bill as many have already alluded to this afternoon that supports the calculation of payments between parents who for whatever reason have found themselves in circumstances where they are living apart and where they need to raise a child. Those are unfortunate circumstances and we have all acknowledged that but it is for the benefit of those children that the financial responsibilities are divided between the parents in a fair in an equitable and in a transparent manner. That is what this bill does. It does not provide for child poverty as Mr Rajen Prasad has asked for and it is not the silver bullet as Mrs Lole-Taylor has suggested was required in this legislation but it is a bill that provides for the upkeep and the maintenance of relationships and in particular it is for our children to be looked after where those circumstances have broken down. 
The contention by Mr Clark in his submission this afternoon that we take into account the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child is misplaced. It is misplaced because we cannot introduce a subjective test in the way that these calculations are performed in order to determine a payment between two parents. It cannot be done in a subjective manner. I think most people agree that an objective formula is the appropriate mechanism with which to allocate resources for a child. The way the formula has arisen and the way it was conducted and has been researched—and we looked at the Australian legislation and the way that it approached this area of the law—we all felt resulted in the appropriate mechanism. To introduce another subjective test to that calculation is inappropriate in my view. In my view it would complicate a simplified bill that has come to this House. 
The Act is 21 years old and what has already been acknowledged across this House is that circumstances have changed. We have numerous blended families now that are living in our country. This bill is a mechanism with which we can calculate the distribution of child support between parents and it is efficient and transparent. The three changes in this bill are that the calculation formula recognises shared care the income of both parents and new estimates of expenditure for raising children in our country. We did look at the formulas. We looked at the way that expenditure was calculated and I think that the amendments that we made to the bill are suitable and appropriate for our country in 2013 going forward. That does not mean of course that this necessarily futureproofs the bill in terms of maybe changing circumstances in the future but in my view this bill is appropriate for 2013 going forward in terms of the factors that we need to take into account. Secondary changes of course to update the scheme took into account key factors such as recognising significant daytime care and relying on parenting orders and agreements. Again I say that those are matters that members across this House have agreed upon. 
This bill cannot come soon enough. I have had a couple of cases in the last year where if this bill had been in place it would have led to a better outcome for the parents involved in those two situations. So I support this bill. I look forward to the Committee stage. Certainly it is a bill that in a very difficult area of the law we can come together to decide upon an appropriate course going forward. Thank you.