Turei Metiria: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Turei Metiria: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 29 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4859. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
6. 
METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he stand by his statement “I don’t want to see any New Zealand child in poverty”? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Acting Prime Minister) 
: 
 The Prime Minister stands by his full statement which is: “I don’t want to see any New Zealand child in poverty and one thing I’m absolutely committed to is making sure they get a decent education so they can choose their own life but I think the argument here has to be to move people out of welfare into work.” That was reinforced by the child poverty report released yesterday which says that a parent obtaining full-time paid employment is the most important event to lift a child out of poverty. 
Metiria Turei 
: Why has the Prime Minister scorned the idea of a new child payment which has been recommended by the Expert Advisory Group on Solutions to Child Poverty as a key way to eliminate child poverty in New Zealand? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The comments were made because a universal payment does not target those in most need. 
Metiria Turei 
: Does the Prime Minister agree with the household incomes report that shows that universal superannuation has contained poverty for older New Zealanders to just 7 percent while child poverty is at a high of 21 percent which is one in five New Zealand children? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: It makes many many assertions and the member can pick off bits and pieces of it if she likes but overall what it says is that the best way to deal with child poverty in New Zealand is to ensure that there are employment opportunities for people who are caregivers or parents. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I want to hear Metiria Turei’s question. 
Metiria Turei 
: Does the Prime Minister agree with Professor Philippa Howden-Chapman a member of the Expert Advisory Group on Solutions to Child Poverty that in New Zealand we have compulsory superannuation for all older people regardless of their income and so we should also have universal support for our youngest and most vulnerable children? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: She is correct in what she says about the superannuation system but what I would say is that when it comes to protecting vulnerable New Zealanders we have a welfare system that in fact does discriminate in favour of allocate larger amounts of money to those who are caregivers. But what we can be certain of is that if parents and caregivers have work you will lessen the prospect of child poverty. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: Does he acknowledge that two out of five children living in poverty are in the homes of families who are in work? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Yes and that is why we are placing a huge focus on growing the economy. Our opponents seem to think that people’s income situations can be advantaged by stifling an economy by saying no to everything that might grow an economy and that is not going to lift anybody let alone any child out of a difficult circumstance. 
Metiria Turei 
: Does the Prime Minister think that the Children’s Commissioner is wrong to conclude that a universal child payment for children aged to 6 and then targeted until age 7 would in fact capture very few wealthy families but ensure that those kids who are most in need get the help that they do need? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I do not agree with that statement and I am surprised that the member can come into this House and regularly criticise the Government for apparently putting in place a tax system that advantages the highest earners and then make a case for the highest earners to receive a universal child benefit. That does not make sense and it will not lift a single child out of poverty. What will is supporting economic growth in this country and it is a shame the member and her party do not wake up and realise that. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: If as he says his Government’s focus has been on growing the economy for those in poverty why has the latest income report shown that those in poverty have stayed in poverty those in the middle have gone backwards and those on upper incomes have all improved their economic status? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Once again you go to the particular measure that might be used and on two pages of the report page 81 and page 82 there are conflicting informations about the difference between incomes in New Zealand. What it does show very clearly though is that between the years 2000 and 2005 the income disparity in New Zealand—inequity—was at its widest point. Even though we have had this spike up due to very very real circumstances in this country and internationally we are nowhere near those huge gap levels of the early 2000s to mid-2000s. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: Can he confirm that the figures he just quoted from were before Working for Families had had its impact in terms of reducing inequality in New Zealand? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: There is no evidence to suggest that Working for Families has been taken away because it has not. Therefore any suggestion—[ 
Interruption 
] Well it is quite simple. The gap between those income groups was in the years 2000 to 2005. I do not think it is fair to say that the figures in here do not show an effect when in fact our opponents will not accept that the figures in here do show the effect of the global financial crisis and the Christchurch earthquakes. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked specifically about the impact that Working for Families has had on inequality and on the figures that the Acting Prime Minister was quoting. I have not come away with a clear answer from the Acting Prime Minister. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The Hon Gerry Brownlee to answer further. [ 
Interruption 
] Order! 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Well in the graph on page 81 that shows the greatest disparity—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I apologise to the Minister—just one moment. Look the member asking the question raised a point of order that her question had not been answered. The Minister realised he did not answer that part of the question he is now answering it and I believe it is reasonable he should be heard. There is too much noise. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: On the two graphs that I am talking to on pages 81 and 82 the greatest disparity is shown in the years 2000 to 2005 under a Labour Government but on the other graph between those same years the trend line is flat. So that would not support the argument being put forward by the member. 
Metiria Turei 
: Why did the Prime Minister tell reporters yesterday that “the very targeted” Working for Families payments were a better option than a universal child payment when that very targeted in-work tax credit system deliberately excludes the poorest children in this country—those whose parents cannot work? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: There are two things that need to be pointed out there. The first is “in work” and that is our focus. We want more people who are currently having to live on benefits to be in work. The second point was “can’t find work”. We want people to make themselves work-ready and we are prepared to assist them to get work-ready. So let us be very very clear: if people are working they need to be given an opportunity to get the benefit of their work. When it comes to people who are not working it seems strange—you just do not put benefits up to destroy the prospect of work in the first place. 
Metiria Turei 
: Since the Prime Minister has now rejected a universal child payment in favour of targeted assistance will he support the Green Party member’s bill that replaces the in-work tax credit with a child payment targeted at the poorest children in New Zealand those who need it the most; if not why not? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The figures here speak for themselves. There are many people in work who need that assistance so we are not going to take it away. Therefore we will not support the Green Party bill.