Ardern Jacinda: Social Security (Youth Support and Work Focus) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Ardern Jacinda: Social Security (Youth Support and Work Focus) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 17 July 2012. Volume:681;Page:3605. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JACINDA ARDERN (Labour) 
: 
 I am pleased to be able to take another call because I did want to get into some substantive remarks and the amendments—in particular around the payment card which is set out in Part 1 of this bill. I do want to acknowledge that the Minister in the chair the Minister for Social Development talked for some period about the nature of those young people who are currently receiving the independent youth benefit and I do thank her for portraying what is I think the reality of the situation for a lot of our young people who are on the independent youth benefit who do have very little support be it from caregivers or parents and who find themselves often in heartbreaking situations that lead to their requiring that level of support at such a young age. 
I think the position that Labour came to on the use of a payment card system was not to deny that intensive services were appropriate for these young people—in fact that is something that we have always strongly supported. Our issue was with the fact as Rajen Prasad has pointed out that the payment card made a presumption about all young people transferring all of them on to a payment card system rather than using the payment card system as a backstop measure. 
So we have an amendment which is on the Table currently that suggests reversing the onus. If a young person demonstrates that they are struggling financially or they have moved into debt for instance a youth service could have the discretion to move the young person on to a youth payment card system if that were appropriate rather than putting everyone on it and then saying: “Well if you earn your right you can come off.” which actually was a position that was reached only after the Social Services Committee debated this provision. In fact it was previously that everyone stayed on for the length of the couple of years until they hit 18 and could move off. So what we are putting to the Committee is the proposition that yes if there is evidence that that additional support was required then use the youth payment card system but let us not make a presumption about all young people. 
The second provision that I want to speak to briefly is clause 8 in Part 1 where it talks about domestic purposes benefit recipients being up to the age of 19. That was something that I was interested in having the Minister’s comment on about the difference there—the length of the period that for instance a young woman might stay on a payment card system versus say a young man on an unemployment benefit. I have had that raised with me; it is an interesting question. I would be interested in hearing her thoughts on why we have those two distinct systems based on the age there. 
I want to come back though to a part that has not been talked to that is currently within the bill. If we flick through to section 125A(1)(a) in clause 18A it talks about the chief executive having the ability to contract with service providers for what is listed as services that are “(i) services of the kind referred to in section 123E(a); or (ii) services in relation to Part 5;”. If we flick through to what Part 5 refers to it talks about financial support for young people. I do not believe that there has been enough public discussion about the fact that this bill substantively transfers powers previously only ever administered by Work and Income to private sometimes community-based NGOs and youth service providers. It was something canvassed at the select committee but it has not been canvassed widely enough in the public domain I believe. Catherine Delahunty has spoken to it; I believe Jan Logie may have as well. The fact is that now decisions and discretionary decisions—quite substantive powers held by Work and Income over things as significant as the financial well-being of that young person and things as personal as emergency food grants; specific needs like that—are being transferred to a youth service provider. That is a significant step away from what we have previously had in New Zealand. 
I know that the Minister has justified this move previously. My concern is that this is one massive pilot project for the wider—the wider—privatisation of the welfare State. The member Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga on the other side of the Chamber shakes his head and I would welcome his taking a call and giving—