Blue Jackie: Child Support Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
Blue Jackie: Child Support Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
[Volume:633;Page:5161] 
Dr JACKIE BLUE (National) 
: 
 I rise to speak on the title of the Child Support Amendment Bill (No 4) but I actually think it is the wrong title. It should probably be the “Let’s Discourage Good and Responsible Parents and Let’s Support the Irresponsible Parents Bill”. 
Judith Collins 
: That’s it. 
Dr JACKIE BLUE 
: That is right. The Minister in the chair prior to the dinner break the Hon David Cunliffe spoke and he admitted as my colleague has just mentioned that it is not a perfect bill. He was absolutely right; it is very imperfect. As my colleague Paul Hutchison said it was too rushed it was not thought through and it was not well prepared. I was appalled when before the dinner break the Minister made veiled threats to my colleagues on this side of the Chamber. I was very disappointed to hear those veiled threats. I thought a Minister would be above such comments but clearly I am wrong. 
Paula Bennett 
: Not a Labour Minister. 
Dr JACKIE BLUE 
: Yes. This bill is a patch-up job. Although I did not have the opportunity to sit on the Social Services Committee from reading through the bill I was very concerned about the timing. The timing was very interesting. I understand that in 2000 the total debt owed by parents was $400 million yet by August 2005 it was up to $1 billion. That was a huge jump and suddenly this Labour Government had to act and a month or two before the election rushed legislation was introduced into the House. We have to ask why that was the case—why Labour had to rush this legislation through. Was it embarrassed that that debt had grown so hugely over ensuing years? Was it an election bribe or was it vote-buying? 
Judith Collins 
: I think it was votes for cash wasn’t it? 
Dr JACKIE BLUE 
: It could have been. It could have been a combination of all the above. But I am not making any apologies: I will be saying how disappointed I am that this bill has come to its final reading stage. National has a number of concerns about this bill and we do not believe that it will do what it says—that is turn irresponsible parents into responsible parents. I mentioned a number of concerns in my earlier speech and I will mention them again because they are important. 
We believe that this bill is flawed and simplistic because it is not a magic wand that on being waved will make parents who have not been paying child support suddenly become responsible. I say that because half of the parents who owe that debt are living out of New Zealand. If they have left New Zealand I ask whether they are responsible parents. They have removed themselves geographically from where their children are and that would tend to suggest they do not want to have the responsibility as parents to bring those children up and be close by. With half the debt being owed by parents living overseas I do not believe that because of this bill—which allows parents to have a deal with the Government in order to pay the money back—those parents will suddenly rush over the Tasman sign up to a contract and start paying the money back when they have not done that to date. I think this bill will fall down in that particular area. 
This bill sends the wrong signals. With it the Government discourages all the responsible parents who have been paying their child support upfront on time and in full—who have been doing the decent thing by their children by society and by themselves—and rewards the irresponsible parents who do not want to pay their child support who have moved out of New Zealand and who do not really show any responsibility. At the end of the day it will not be legislation that changes those parents or those future parents who do not want to have responsibility for their children. I agree with all the comments from all my colleagues on all sides of the Chamber that we want strong families and we want parents to nurture and bring up their children but legislation and nanny State will not do it. 
The bill also sends the wrong signal in terms of fairness. This bill is not fair to other groups in the country. This Government is applying retrospective legislation to irresponsible parents who do not want to front up but what about all the other groups in this country who have been paying up who have been paying their taxes and GST and who have been doing the right thing? What about the family that has got behind in its mortgage repayments? Will this Government rush to its aid by passing retrospective legislation or help pay that family’s bills? I mentioned a health group I have met with which has struggled. It is a non-governmental organisation in the mental health area that is struggling and it has got behind in its tax bill for no particular reason.