Social Assistance (Living Alone Payments) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Social Assistance (Living Alone Payments) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:669;Page:16436] 
Social Assistance (Living Alone Payments) Amendment Bill 
First Reading 
Debate resumed from 24 November. 
TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) 
: 
 It gives me pleasure on a Tuesday evening to speak in support of the Social Assistance (Living Alone Payments) Amendment Bill. The reason it gives me pleasure to speak at this time is that the National Government is committed to certainty and security for older New Zealanders. Indeed we have been working hard over the last 2 years to cut red tape and reduce regulations. We are easing the burden for older New Zealanders so that they can get the assistance they are entitled to. After 2 years of a National Government this bill is further evidence of the Government’s commitment to ensuring that superannuitants and veterans pensioners receive their full entitlements. We are making sure that older New Zealanders especially following bereavement are not forced to fill out application forms and go through more bureaucracy or bureaucratic processes. We are making sure that older New Zealanders receive their full entitlement so that they do not suffer unnecessary financial hardship. I know that all of the members in the House believe that this is good news. 
Over the last 2 years the National Government has delivered an extra $71 a fortnight into the pockets of New Zealand superannuitants and that was completed this year. It has already delivered a double boost of tax cuts to superannuitants this year by both increasing the amount of and cutting the tax on New Zealand superannuation. 
In my electorate office we have a number of superannuitants who come to us. Often there is concern because they are not sure what they are entitled to. In many cases we are able to provide them with assistance. But the good news in respect of this bill is that for people entitled to a living alone allowance it will be backdated to the very day they should have received that entitlement rather than from that date only if they apply within 28 days. When pensioners or those on a veterans pension lose their loved one that is a time of difficulty when they would certainly have many other things on their mind. When this bill enters into force those people will be able to receive their full entitlement from the day they are eligible for it not just if they apply within 28 days or otherwise from the day they apply for it. 
This is very good legislation and I am glad that many parties in this Parliament have committed their support to it. Indeed I hope that all members of this House will support this legislation. It will get out of the way some unnecessary red tape it will certainly remove some of the uncertainty that many of our pensioners suffer from and it will deliver them financial assistance when they very much need it. I commend the bill to the House. 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) 
: 
 Labour supports the Social Assistance (Living Alone Payments) Amendment Bill. The bill amends three main aspects. The first—as has been set out by the member who has just spoken Todd McClay—is that it replaces the living alone payment and the current rates of New Zealand superannuation and veterans pension for single superannuitants with a new single living alone rate of superannuation and the veterans pension. 
This amendment will remove the requirement for superannuitants to make an additional application for a full entitlement at a very distressing time which is usually when there has been the death of a partner or a spouse. At the moment when that happens they are required to make a special application to receive it. In addition they have to do it within a given time period of 28 days in order to get it backdated. This can be a real burden on older New Zealanders who are really finding it hard at the moment and are really feeling the pinch. 
I note that the member who has just spoken talked about the additional assistance to superannuitants. I believe that if he has been seeing his constituents as I have been seeing mine he will know that even with some additional help in the Budget they are still finding it very difficult with increases in power charges increases in their rates increases in food prices and so on. This change makes it better for a group of people who find themselves in awkward circumstances upon the death of a spouse in particular. 
The second part of this amendment bill aligns the definition of a dependent child in the New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Act with the definition provided in the Social Security Act. This amendment is a response to a decision by the Social Security Appeal Authority in a case relating to decisions made by the chief executive of the Ministry of Social Development in May and June 2008. 
The third part of this amendment bill updates the definition of a boarding house so that it is brought into line with the definition that refers to a licensed boarding house. This is a new definition that has recently been amended in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The Labour Opposition supports this bill. 
CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Deputy Speaker. Tena koutou e te Whare. I first thank the Minister for Social Development and Employment for her consultation with the Green Party prior to the introduction of the Social Assistance (Living Alone Payments) Amendment Bill. I advise the House that the Green Party will support it in all its stages. 
It is pleasing to see the Government’s commitment to rectifying two longstanding anomalies with regard to New Zealand superannuation and the veterans pension. The first of these is that the living alone payment payable to New Zealand superannuitants and veterans pensioners who live on their own or in some cases with no one other than a child who is still dependent is technically a separate benefit from New Zealand superannuation or a living alone payment itself. That previous sentence did not make a lot of sense to me but I think it makes sense in the long run. 
Hon Member 
: Sing it. 
CATHERINE DELAHUNTY 
: I would sing it because I have a fabulous voice but I think I would make everyone else feel a little bit weak if I sang it. I will sing when I have finished. 
However the Green Party agrees that this is an unnecessarily bureaucratic— 
Hon Member 
: Sing of good things. 
CATHERINE DELAHUNTY 
: Here I am supporting the bill and now everybody is giving me a hard time. That is so unusual. 
The Green Party agrees that this is an unnecessarily bureaucratic state of affairs which is so surprising with regard to Work and Income! It has resulted in a small number of people who were entitled to the living alone payment missing out on receiving it when for example their partner has died and they have transferred to the single rate of New Zealand superannuation. No one at Work and Income has told them they also need to apply for the living alone payment. As a former beneficiary advocate I can say that that was the norm. Unfortunately Work and Income New Zealand often did not tell people what they were entitled to hence the need for clarity. 
The other anomaly this bill corrects is the provision under which the children of New Zealand superannuitants and veterans pensioners cease to be classified as dependent when they reach the age of 18 whereas children of working-age beneficiaries continue to be classified as dependent until the end of the year in which they turn 18 as long as they are still undertaking study. The bill will apply the same more generous definition of dependent child to the children of New Zealand superannuitants and veterans pensioners as is currently applied to those of working-age beneficiaries. 
The Green Party welcomes both of these changes as they correct anomalies that although they affect only a small number of people impact on those people quite severely. It is pleasing to see this Government’s continuing commitment to fairness and social justice for those eligible for State social assistance as a result of their age or of their incapacity due to military service—and military service only in many cases. 
However the Government’s approach with this bill is in stark contrast to its treatment of working-age beneficiaries who are incapacitated for employment for reasons other than military service: those whose ability to participate in the paid workforce is restricted because of their childcare responsibilities and those who want to work but cannot find a job because our economy does not provide enough jobs to go around. 
The Government has recently enacted Future Focus legislation—or as I like to call it future unfocused legislation—that introduces anomalies into rather than removing them from the benefit system. It increases the likelihood of people falling through the cracks in our welfare State being wrongly assessed as having the capacity for work when they clearly have not and losing part or all of their benefit entitlement under the sanctions regime that the legislation has introduced. 
Further down the Order Paper there are more bills like this one. They purport to rectify anomalies but because some of them deal with accident compensation they take an exactly opposite approach to the approach of this bill. 
Hone Harawira 
: Come on Catherine we want to go home. 
CATHERINE DELAHUNTY 
: I know Hone wants to go home. I want to go home too but I have a passion for social justice. 
This bill addresses legislative anomalies by taking a fair and generous approach which is a contradiction of the approach in many other bills such as the accident compensation legislation and such as what has been done to students in recent legislation which is much worse. 
I have had the opportunity to read the Government’s Welfare Working Group report and its options paper. Interestingly bigger-picture issues relating to New Zealand superannuation were outside the terms of reference for the Welfare Working Group. One of the most significant issues of our time is outside its terms of reference. That I guess reflects the Government’s commitment to treating that group of New Zealanders fairly and with compassion! 
The Welfare Working Group launched into a wholesale attack on working-age beneficiaries. It set out four options for strong signals to discourage the semi-permanent use of the benefit system. 
Hon Member 
: Too long. 
CATHERINE DELAHUNTY 
: I have to talk about this because somebody has to talk about it. It is really really important that somebody cares about the vulnerable in society. I know that Hone agrees with me when I say that we have major problems with the benefit system. I am afraid I am just going to carry on until there is recognition of the problems that the benefit system has created. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I am one person who does want to hear what the member is saying. Can we just quieten it down slightly please so I can hear Catherine Delahunty. 
CATHERINE DELAHUNTY 
: Thank you so much Mr Deputy Speaker; I am now inspired to talk for a whole lot longer. 
There are increasing conditions with benefit duration including work-for-the-dole regimes for longer-term beneficiaries strict income management for long-term beneficiaries time-limited benefits and benefit step-downs under which components of the benefit are removed when a person has been on a benefit for a period considered “too long”—the Welfare Working Group suggests a year. These suggestions are appalling. 
The Welfare Working Group put forward only four options to discourage semi-permanent use of the benefit system. That is what they called it. It is a shameful description for what was once a proud country that committed itself to looking after the vulnerable. None of these suggestions are acceptable in a caring compassionate and fair society. 
Although we support this bill we say that this Government exhibits a double standard in its treatment of those in receipt of State social assistance. As shown by this bill it treats those who receive assistance on account of their age or their incapacity due to military service with fairness and compassion. On the other hand working-age beneficiaries are victimised and harassed under this Government’s policies. 
With that statement of the contradictions I will finish this brilliant speech. It is very important that members show their appreciation because somebody has to stand up for the poor in this bloody Parliament—and that is me. Kia ora. 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) 
: 
 I have much to say about the Social Assistance (Living Alone Payments) Amendment Bill and I am very grateful to the whips for allowing me to take my full 10 minutes on it! I think all members will be better off because of that. In commending the bill to the House I just mention the same point that the member Mrs King talked about and that is the 28-day backdating. I have had a couple of cases come through my office involving challenging situations of deceased spouses and people not really wanting to do those sorts of things within 28 days. This bill is a very good victory I think for common sense and I commend it to the House. 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour) 
: 
 I will take just a very very brief call. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I know you have been waiting for this call; you told me that earlier. 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: It is nice to know that when a bill before the House makes as much sense as the Social Assistance (Living Alone Payments) Amendment Bill does it can be supported by members with the shortest speeches possible. This is unlike the situation when members on the other side of the House throughout Friday and Saturday took very short calls on very very important bills. I am happy to commend this bill to the House. 
Bill read a first time. 
Hon DAVID CARTER (Minister of Agriculture) 
: 
 I seek leave to amend the date for the Social Services Committee to report the bill from 28 February 2011—as indicated in Minister Bennett’s speech of 24 November—to 6 May 2011. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that change from 28 February to 6 May 2011. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Hon DAVID CARTER (Minister of Agriculture) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: I move  
That the Social Services Committee consider the Social Assistance (Living Alone Payments) Amendment Bill that the committee report finally to the House on or before 6 May 2011 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting (except during oral questions) and during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 187 and 190(1)(b) and (c).  
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the motion be agreed to. 
Ayes 78 
New Zealand National 58; Green Party 9; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; United Future 1. 
Noes 42 
New Zealand Labour 41; Progressive 1. 





Motion agreed to.