Collins Judith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Collins Judith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 15 May 2008. Volume:647;Page:16017. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
12.  
JUDITH COLLINS (National—Clevedon) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: Is she confident that the Families Commission provides a voice for New Zealand families; if so why? 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 Yes; the Families Commission has consulted widely to ensure that it is identifying issues that are of concern to New Zealand families and has represented those issues strongly. It has provided contributions on matters such as the prevention of family violence after-school childcare paid parental leave and caring for children after parental separation. Those issues are important to New Zealand families. 
Judith Collins 
: Does she think that the Families Commission should spend less time on vanity events like its planned summit that will “raise the commission’s profile and provide a mandate for its ongoing work” and more time on addressing the serious issues facing New Zealand families like child poverty; if not why not?  
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: The main function set out in statute is for the Families Commission to act as an advocate for the interests of families generally. The commission has taken that statutory responsibility seriously and is ensuring that as part of that function it is connected with New Zealand families and is able to represent their views properly. I do not know why the Families Commission would want to duplicate the work of the Children’s Commissioner but if that is what the member has in store for it I am sure the commission would find that very interesting. 
Judith Collins 
: How much time does the Families Commission spend on analysing its own profile as detailed in the recent communications review by a public relations firm and how exactly does that help the 185000 children who were recently identified as living in poverty and the beneficiary families that the Minister recently admitted are worse off now than they were in 1991? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: Can I firstly address my comments in response to the end point that the member made and say that I have never said what the member just referred to. I know that beneficiaries and their families are better off under a Labour-led Government and always will be. The member should not misrepresent either my words or the truth. The decade of the 1990s was the hardest for beneficiary families in New Zealand and I hope that we and they never have the ill fortune to have that member’s party leading our country again. 
Judith Collins 
: How exactly does it help the 185000 children who are living in poverty and the beneficiary families that this Minister did admit as shown in the  
Sunday Star-Times 
 are worse off now than they were in 1991 to have the Families Commission spend time and money on analysing its own profile? 
Hon RUTH DYSON 
: I repeat I have never said and nor is it true what the member has just referred to. Beneficiary families are better off under a Labour-led Government than they have been in the past and will ever be in the future under a National-led Government. That is a fact and the member knows it. I have heard her welfare policies and that certainly reinforces both the fact and the perception that beneficiaries are better off under a Labour-led Government. In my view leadership in areas such as the prevention of family violence looking at the needs of New Zealand families in regard to after-school childcare looking at paid parental leave and its extension—which that member and her party voted against when it was introduced in New Zealand—and an increasing issue of how we should care for New Zealand children after their parents have separated are issues of concern and clear and strong leadership on them are demonstrated by the Families Commission. 
Judith Collins 
: I seek the leave of the House to table an article written by senior journalist Ruth Laugesen of the  
Sunday Star-Times  
where the Minister is quoted as confirming that beneficiary families are worse off now than they were in 1991. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.