Cunliffe David: Social Assistance (Portability to Cook Islands Niue and Tokelau) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCunliffe David: Social Assistance (Portability to Cook Islands Niue and Tokelau) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 16 June 2015. Volume:706;Page:4459. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn): I rise to take a short call in support of the bill along with my colleagues. I acknowledge that we are in the Committee stage on Part 2 but as the Chair will be aware Part 2 contains almost all of the operative provisions of the bill and therefore it is appropriate I think that we are able to traverse in reasonable breadth the guiding principles of the bill and the way it will be implemented. The first point that is germane to Labour’s support of this bill is that it pertains to residents and citizens of the Realm of New Zealand. The Cook Islands Niue and Tokelau are not entirely separate constitutional entities; they are part of the Realm of New Zealand. So when we go back to first principles we ask ourselves whether it is appropriate that they should enjoy the rights of other New Zealand citizens to pension entitlements. Then in principle there is a very strong argument that they should.The second argument that we have considered is the fact that those communities have made a significant contribution to New Zealand and that large parts of their historic populations and high proportions of their current population are ordinarily resident in New Zealand. Therefore the productive lives of many of their sons and daughters have been spent in New Zealand and have enriched our country. Therefore there is an argument—I think a very powerful argument—that it is appropriate that both those sons and daughters and their parents ought to be able to enjoy the benefits of a funded retirement in the Cook Islands Niue and Tokelau.Thirdly I think it is germane—and as a former health Minister and immigration Minister I am informed by past practice and precedent here—to note that New Zealand’s economic interests are probably well served by this bill. The reason is that we all know that there are significant advantages to ageing in place. We leave aside for a moment the issue of being trans-border; we know that our own senior citizens often prefer to live in their own homes for as long as they can before health issues overtake them and they need to move into a retirement care facility. In the same way there are distinct advantages to people being able to live in the Islands if that is where they have grown up and they have had their families and their memories. It also means that they probably will be a lower economic cost to the New Zealand health system based in those Island countries. Although there is an upfront cost to making the pension portable there is a downstream saving to our health system.Those upfront costs are significant but they are not insurmountable according to officials’ analysis. We are looking at roughly an extension of around $4.5 million to $5 million per annum by 2016-2017 with administration costs to the new legislation of between $70000 and $137000 up to 2016 declining to $66000 thereafter. In terms of the broad numbers those are not huge numbers. Given the principles that we have enunciated at the start which are the contributions of those peoples to New Zealand and our close constitutional relationship with those parts of the Realm it is certainly our view that those costs are well warranted and indeed offset by savings to the health system.Let me note in relation to this part another set of interests that are well served. New Zealand is historically located in the South-west Pacific. This is our strategic front yard. Those parts of the Realm of New Zealand as the world becomes ever more complex have never been more important for us to hold close hold dear and hold intact. That is a contribution to New Zealand’s national security that is not to be underestimated. Therefore this is one of those happy coincidences of both principle and interest. It is principle because of the considerable contribution that residents of those parts of the Realm of New Zealand have made to the broader New Zealand society and economy. It is a contribution that is well known to those of us from west Auckland which has a high population of peoples of those communities.