Ngaro AlfredHon ALFRED NGARO (National): I thank the Minister for Children the Hon Tracey Martin for her comments. We agree that it should be evidence-based and we should be looking for proactive solutions to this. Here's the question that I would like to pose to the Minister in the chair the Hon Carmel Sepuloni. For all those that it hasn't worked for what about those for whom it has worked? What are the numbers there? Here's the thing: if we're talking about it being evidence-based what has been the costing on those who have disclosed and who've actually contributed? So what you're doing now is this: you are setting a precedent. In actual fact those who have done the right thing—we've heard stories about that—and who have actually disclosed who the other parent is which has made them accountable have now contributed. You've only costed from where as we understand—and I'm happy to be proved wrong. You might have the evidence there of the costing of what it would be then for the whole amount of those on a sole parent benefit—right—in regards to those who have disclosed where there's been payment. Now the State is going to have to bear the cost of that whole costing for those children. That's what we're talking about. So to the Minister in the chair if she could provide that information that would be helpful as well. The Minister also talked about the issues around solutions and in fact the Hon Tracey Martin talked about that. There are discretions already here. So when we've gone down to discretions it's not a safety issue and it's not an issue of if you can't find out if you're not sure or if you don't know. It could have been an indiscriminate sort of relationship for a period of time and they've gone. There is nothing there when you go through the discretions that would bar somebody on an issue of safety or on an issue of not being able to find out who the lawful parent is—nothing. So what are we left with? We're left with an adult who has the opportunity to disclose the person—to disclose the person. That's what we are talking about. So if you're talking about making adults responsible then you've just removed that. You've just removed the ability to make those adults responsible. You've made a good point and I would say to the Minister in the chair then what other alternatives did she seek? They were talking about opportunities for it being evidence-based. Well the Minister talked about reducing the number of children in poverty but what we know from the trends from 2014 through to 2018 is that the reduction in the number of those on sole parent support was on average 3400—on average 3400. But from March 2018 to March 2019 the only decrease was six—six. So is this Government is now saying that in actual fact they want to reduce child poverty? Are they now counting—the fact is that a parent with children in a benefit-dependent home is classed as reducing children in poverty because according to the stats according to the figures it's clearly showing that under this Government what we're actually doing is increasing the number of people on benefits. They're not decreasing it; they are increasing it. That's what they're doing. You're increasing the number who are on benefits. So to the Minister in the chair I would like to put a couple of those questions to her. The other question that I would like to put to the Minister as well is in regard to discretions. When she talked about it being evidence-based what other evidence did she show for other opportunities? If we talk about evidence I want to refer to this report. This is called the Heckman report for 2010 and it says this: The key to a successful welfare state lies in devising proper incentives to encourage actors at all levels of the economic system to respond to the new opportunities. In principle a welfare state can provide the proper incentives for productivity and at the same time accord a measure of security and dignity for all citizens." I would like the Minister to respond to that. What evidence did she supply? It's one thing to have a report but did she delve into the evidence around the decisions that were made? The recommendations that were presented to her—I'd like the Minister to present that evidence and the reports that she refers to around these recommendations because we haven't seen that. As my good friend and colleague the Hon Louise Upston has been saying here she made an Official Information Act (OIA) request for those reports and did not receive them. So much for a transparent and open Government! Here we are in urgency in this committee stage—and by the way the indexing will take another four years with only $11—and yet still we are just now being presented with the potential of the answer to that OIA request. I have these questions. I have other questions I'd like to pose to the Minister. I look forward to her response as soon as possible."