Fairbrother Russell: Corrections (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill Customs and Excise (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
Fairbrother Russell: Corrections (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill Customs and Excise (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation (Social Assistance) Amendment Bill — Third Readings 
[Volume:646;Page:15379] 
RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (Labour) 
: 
 That was Dr Paul Hutchison who was an erstwhile member of the Social Services Committee which processed the legislation with all speed. I am delighted he is high in his praise of the need for the legislation. I am sad that I have missed part of his speech. I dare say it had parts that were critical of the Government because ex gratia comments like that are made all the time. But in substance he has to admit as do all members on the opposite side that there is a tide in the affairs of men that when taken at the flood leads on to fortune and in this case the Government has spent 8 years rebuilding the infrastructure so that legislation such as this can be introduced. Under the rather futile tax cut policy that National runs all the time which questions the morality of Government spending we would never be able to afford the infrastructure that enables via three pieces of legislation three Government departments to be pulled together to ease the stopping of a benefit when the need ceases because of an individual’s change of circumstances such as being taken into custody or leaving the country. What underlies this bill which is deceptively simple on its face are the keen issues. 
I have to say that I was going to raise a point of order at 2 o’clock today when Parliament started because I thought the Minister of Statistics would be called upon to give a speech on his 30th birthday. However I was intimidated; I knew he was nervous about approaching this event and he has tried to do so as anonymously and quietly as possible. He is not one for fanfare when it comes to minor milestones like reaching 30 and I did not want to raise publicity. 
I return to the bill and I have to say that it covers the danger of excursion into the privacy of individuals. We must value the privacy of all individuals whether or not they are serving a term of imprisonment. It is equally important for all of us. If we treat lightly the excursion into the privacy of one class of individual then we will likely do so for other classes of individuals. So this bill had to balance the need for efficient payment of benefits with the right of individuals to privacy some of whom have no control over their circumstances because they are serving a custodial term. This bill tightly constrains the circumstances in which there can be data matching between the Department of Corrections and the Ministry of Social Development. This data matching is set about in tightly constrained parameters so that when a circumstance arises the computer systems automatically identify the change of circumstance and bring to an end the payment of the benefit in circumstances when individuals can be excused for not turning their minds to such mundane matters as receipt of the weekly income because the emotional turmoil at being sentenced to a term of imprisonment is their supervening and dominant thought. 
Of course the select committee was concerned as has been remarked on already in this House about the need to ensure that prisoners and particularly their families were aware that their income status would change. The report of the Social Services Committee contained a recommendation that at times of sentencing and remands in custody courthouses be manned with officials from the Ministry of Social Development so that they could speak with families and advise them that there would be an automatic change in the right to a benefit. That way individuals who might be affected by a change could be aware of that at what is really a most traumatic time for any family caught up in the cycle of our criminal justice system. It is probably too much to expect that this wish of the committee will be carried out. It probably was included to salve our concerns about the incursion on liberty and privacy but it is a recommendation and it is one that I note will have no hope of being fulfilled if the rampant tax cuts advocated by the members opposite are ever put in place. It is constructive human interventions such as this—which are supported from the public purse and which make the cogency of society so successful—that are damaged and in fact rendered impotent by thoughtless tax cuts for a few who may gain an extra few dollars a week. 
I stand here proud that this legislation achieves what it sets out to achieve. I am very pleased that it will be read into law hopefully today. The legislation tidies up the position of those people who lose their freedom and it means that there is an adjustment of benefit on an automatic basis but hopefully and with all seriousness it is intended not to disturb the right of entitlement of any dependants they had at the time of their change of status in respect of their freedom. 
This legislation in my view has benefited from the work of the select committee. I dealt with that during the second reading debate. Amendments were made by agreement of all parties on the select committee and they have survived the Committee stage. I think this legislation will rest on the statute book without much challenge in the courts because it is purely infrastructural legislation and it minimises the unnecessary excursions into an individual’s situation so there appears to be no need for it to be challenged in our courts of law. But if that ever did occur I think there is a degree of elegance in the drafting of the legislation that will survive even the closest judicial scrutiny and it will remain on our statute book for a long time or at least for as long as this country can afford to have a public service that is adequately funded and can fulfil its responsibilities to each and every individual in our community to make good the services of the Government. 
These are the entitlements of every individual out there which we should not take lightly and all of us should resist stoutly the cry of a few for the immediate benefit of a tax cut. At the end of the day a responsible tax cut is one thing but excessive tax cuts are another and this legislation is a great example as Dr Paul Hutchison will recognise of what can be done when we have a properly funded Government and of what we could not do if we had a Government that lived on a very tight and an insufficient budget. 
I am not one to delay the passing of this legislation by addressing issues that have no relevance to it and I do not wish to have unnecessary verbiage on a matter that is as straightforward as this. But I feel that those few passing wise remarks will be well-received by my friends opposite—Dr Hutchison and Katrina Shanks—both of whom I see take great comfort as they sit alongside each other from listening to the words I have uttered today. I thank them for their splendid cooperative support during the select committee stage. But to get to the point of the matter I really want to commend this legislation to the House. 
I will bring this speech to an end so that we can get the legislation passed. I ask the House to go forward and take the vote on it and to proceed to the next major piece of business on the Order Paper which I daresay will be equally as elegant and important as is this legislation.