Prasad Rajen: Child Support Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Prasad Rajen: Child Support Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 27 February 2013. Volume:687;Page:8302. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour) 
: 
 There are just a few final points I want to make on this part of the Child Support Amendment Bill. There is one element of this Part 2 that does please me and I think it is a good set of provisions. In my observation over the years I have been involved in social provision it is easy to see how child support or the lack of payment of child support has received bad press and a bad name. That has happened quite consistently over the years where people have quoted the amount that is owing to the State. Many people outside do not realise that much of that is by way of penalties—not the base amount but penalties—and they grow very very quickly. This has given child support a bad name and this bill does address that quite well. 
It has a much more appropriate penalty regime: it is graded and there is an incentive if you like for people not to let it get out of hand. I want to commend the designers of this bill for those particular provisions. I think it is quite a good set of provisions. They are quite well graded and lots of checks and balances are built into there. So that is a good provision in this part and I think it will have an effect on the press if you like about child support. I think that is a positive aspect of it. 
The other aspect that I want to talk briefly about is the automatic deductions regime. I know that others have spoken about this and I note that Melissa Lee in her comments was singing the praises of this particular provision. It is a complete switch-round. Instead of being an opt-in provision it is now an opt-out one. It is really up to people to say that they want to opt out of this particular provision. I know that there are some additional provisions that we worked on in the Social Services Committee to say that for particular reasons—and cultural reasons have been mentioned but it is not just cultural reasons; it is for a whole bunch of reasons—you would not want your employer to have that information. That provision is still an opt-out provision. People have got to go and do something about it themselves not the other way round. We are worried about that and I think we will have to watch this because as the last speaker Jacinda Ardern said there is no history on the Government benches of respecting privacy of information in recent times. The burden then is on members opposite to actually ensure that provisions are built in in such a way that that kind of abuse that has taken place does not occur. I think that is quite an important provision in this particular bill which we will be watching and we are not certain that this is the best way to go. 
The next point I want to make actually links into that point. It is that in order to ensure that with this system which is now quite a complex system that has been designed there is a real possibility of the Inland Revenue Department actually delivering on it. We think the jury is out. It is already being pushed out another year. The computer program that others have talked about is now really struggling under the current demands and yet we have this new set of provisions that will demand much more of that system going forward. This should not be introduced unless it is guaranteed that the $1.5 billion—that is the figure to be spent on a computer system—will actually deliver on this. There are many more computer systems that the State has invested multimillion dollars in that have failed than have been successful. This is a major one. So here there is a risk for these provisions that have been added into the current system. We just wanted to signal that we have major concerns about that. We think that the system that is designed here is now quite complex. The formula is complex the system is complex and there are reviews being built in as well. In order for all of that to operate well that computer system has got to be bedded in not like some others that all of us could talk about that are producing all kinds of perverse effects. Unless that is done the risk will be realised. That also then addresses the question or the risk or the problem really of the huge expenditure.