Macindoe TimHon TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): Thank you Madam Chair. What a fantastic choice. I'm delighted that you've done so. I have great respect for the Minister who's in the chair the Hon Peeni Henare; I know he's a very decent and intelligent man but I was astonished when he prefaced his remarks at the start of this particular debate—after the dinner adjournment at least—by saying that Part 2 contains minor and technical changes. I think that's what I heard him say. Well I felt that that was the new slogan for a Tui beer ad and as Ms Upston commented in her comments this is a very substantial part of a huge bill.For the benefit of people who may be watching at home let me show Supplementary Order Paper 25 to them. These are not just minor and technical amendments Mr Henare; these are very substantial changes and I have to say some of them have been very poorly thought-out. But most importantly—and most outrageously—they've just been dumped on this committee with no opportunity for the usual scrutiny that you would expect to be able to take place. This is not just a minor technical bill; we are talking about one of the most important aspects of legislation that New Zealanders can enjoy and in many many cases heavily depend upon.So I will be most enthusiastically lending my support to the Hon Louise Upston's amendments that she has indicated. I also look forward to the Minister's replies to the comments that she has made the concerns she's outlined and in particular the answers to the questions that she has raised which I know just looking around from the many colleagues who are here with me many of my colleagues are going to be raising tonight as well. It's an important issue.Given the diversity and the complexity of modern family arrangements—and they seem to become a little bit more diverse with every passing year in this day and age—it's appalling that step-parents are being discriminated against in this part of the bill. With these latest proposals whether it's just unintended consequences—somebody has made a drafting error as has been suggested—or whether it's deliberate either way these things must be corrected. I implore the Government to step back from the entrenched position that you've taken so far and send this bill back to the select committee. In particular send this part back to the select committee and give submitters; give concerned interested New Zealanders; and give MPs the chance to do justice to it.As Liz Craig the previous speaker noted new Subpart 9A of Part 2 in SOP 25 deals with the winter energy payment. I remember being here in the House just before Christmas when the winter energy payment was a major feature of the Government's mini-Budget. I thought well in some respects that's a nice idea because there are many people who struggle to pay the power bills and if it's possible to give them support well I'm certainly happy to see that happen.But what an untargeted and unsatisfactory measure they introduced. So I want to point out to Ms Craig who said how thrilled she was with it that there are major blunders. One of the major blunders is the fact that it is so inflexible. Why couldn't the Government have recognised that there are many people on low incomes and on benefits who are living in homes with very old costly heating appliances? The best way they could spend the winter energy payment would be to take it in a lump sum and go and get a much more fuel-efficient climatically efficient emissions-reducing sort of thing that would in the long term save them a lot of money over time and also ensure that their emissions were reduced.But oh no. The Government wouldn't consider that. And so instead we have this we know best" one-size-fits-all approach that seems typical of Labour Governments and here you've got a ridiculous anomaly where there are many people who are still earning quite good incomes but are past retirement age who get the winter energy payment whether they need it or not. I've had people say to me "This is ludicrous that I'm getting this payment while at the same time there are many people who are on the very lowest incomes in New Zealand who are not qualifying for the winter energy payment."About the only thing I can agree with Ms Craig on in the particular comment she made there was that the definition of winter is underwhelming. Well I have to say that all aspects of this particular initiative are underwhelming because they're so badly thought through.But I want to make the point again: this is a very substantial part of a very important bill. It has not been given the proper consideration it needs. This is an outrage. It should go back to the select committee. I implore the Government to make that decision. Send it back."