Pettis Jill: Social Security (Child Benefit) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Pettis Jill: Social Security (Child Benefit) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:617;Page:12698] 
JILL PETTIS (Labour—Whanganui) 
: 
 First of all I respect the proponent of this bill Sue Bradford. I know she has done a lot of work on this bill that in proposing it she is heartfelt and sincere and I acknowledge that. Also on a very personal note I was a child raised under a family benefit system and when my children were very young I received the family benefit as a parent. It was a good system but it was not perfect. I remember that my husband earned $16 a year too much for us to be able to capitalise on the family benefit to buy our first home. It meant that we had to have a second mortgage of $2500 at 14 percent as opposed to my husband’s rehab loan at 3 percent. I am looking at one of my colleagues across the House Bill Gudgeon a former serviceman who understands what a rehab loan is. Our getting rid of that second mortgage at an awful interest rate of 14 percent was a priority and we bemoaned the fact that we were not eligible to capitalise on the family benefit because my husband earned $16 a year too much. 
The family benefit is an important part of our social history. In 1972 the year our eldest child was born the benefit was increased to $3 per week as opposed to $1.50 and there were cries that there would be a population boom. If only we had had a population boom after 1972 it might have been quite good for this country but the dire predictions that were made at that time did not come to pass. That is just a personal comment on the history of the family benefit as we know it. 
As my colleague Steve Maharey commented also the forthcoming Budget which of course members on this side of the House are very much looking forward to being made public means that in effect Sue Bradford’s bill will be superseded by what the Budget will be able to introduce for working families in New Zealand and young families in particular. 
It is part of our political history to place a priority on addressing child poverty. That is not something that can be addressed and corrected in a short span of time. In fact I think today’s event with the culmination of the hikoi on the forecourt is very much about people’s impatience to have income inadequacies addressed in a short period of time. That does not always occur overnight. But I know and speak with confidence that the forthcoming Budget will see many improvements to family income assistance. 
I understand that when one is trying to address the serious shortcomings in income that have occurred over the last decade or so that assistance cannot come quick enough for a number of people. But it is something that has to be addressed in a systematic planned and programmed way so that assistance is targeted to where the most need is. We look forward to that being promulgated later on this month. 
I conclude by saying that I know this bill has been put forward with sincerity but I also look forward to the Budget which will address many of the issues that the member promoting this bill also wishes to see addressed in as quick a time as possible.