Upston Louise; O'Connor GregHon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō): As I said this is the seventh time this Minister has introduced legislation in this House with insufficient scrutiny by the public—the seventh time—and that is outrageous; absolutely outrageous. She's just said this is a complex change—oh so the officials get all the time but the public don't. The public don't have the right to be consulted to have time to submit to consider the issues. So whether it's a tax specialist whether it is the Child Poverty Action Group whether it is Save the Children whether it is beneficiary advocates whether is it the Children's Commissioner—no none of them get the opportunity to submit on this legislation.I'll tell you why—I will tell the House why. So this was a recommendation in May 2019 in the Welfare Expert Advisory Group; one of the proposals I have to say that the National Party in principle agreed with. But why is it that five years later in the final kind of run all of a sudden there's a rush? Oh guess what! Oh it's called an election and this is a Labour Government that's been criticised for not delivering for failing to deliver to lift 100000 children out of poverty. So what do we do? Here we have another shortened report-back—another process where the people that are compromised are the public and yet they will say Oh it's about getting the money out the door. It's got to be done by 1 July." Well there's been five years to do that. So why is it now just a run in the final—oh it might have something to do with the fact that the child poverty statistics came out last week and there was no change in the last year. Oh and I think the other thing it's probably got to do with is that former Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern is about to exit the building and they want her reputation to be intact when actually she's failed to deliver on child poverty. So the fact that five years after this policy was agreed to by the Government—five years later—Hon Peeni Henare: Hurry up but slow down.Hon LOUISE UPSTON: —we have two months—less than two months—yep and there's a Minister who doesn't care about the public doesn't care about democracy doesn't care about the ability of submitters to look at complex pieces of legislation to offer their views. If it was so urgent and it was about getting the money out the door why aren't the unsupported children involved? Why is the unsupported child benefit not included? No because there's an election round the corner and Labour are desperate to say they've done something and that is all it is. So the public are the ones that are sacrificed because they don't get to have a say in this legislation. So it is absolutely outrageous. Five years after the decision was made but eight weeks—eight weeks—for the public. But this is the Minister who's actually now the Deputy Prime Minister who has a common level of behaviour which is to ram legislation through this House. Where is the planning; where is the execution? "Oh no no. We just ram it through in the final hurdle." And because there's an election coming up they're desperate to say they've delivered and that Minister is desperate to say they've done something because the Child Poverty Action Group come out time and time again and say "Of the 42 Welfare Expert Advisory Group recommendations how many have been delivered?" Zero—zero. So this is another example. One of the recommendations that this Minister is desperate to jam over the line—and it's a failure in process; it is a failure to respect the public and to respect the sector. Harete Hipango and I have met many of the children's sector over the last couple of weeks. They will be disgusted at this; they will be disgusted that they will not have the opportunity. Many of them have small organisations; they don't have lots of staff ready to go—the same with charitable organisations who will want to submit that I know that my colleague Maureen Pugh has been talking to. To get a bill like this that is so complex landed on them with a shortened submission time frame and a shortened report-back is quite frankly insulting to the very very important work that they do on our behalf each and every day. It is an insult to them that this Minister is jamming a piece of legislation through again—this is number seven; number seven—without the ability for the public to scrutinise when she herself says it's a very complex piece of legislation. That is a disgrace. It's simply not good enough. Here we are again having a debate about a Government that is shortening due process and has zero regard for the public in their views and the sector. Even on an absolutely critical issue on measures that we all agree—we all want to see child poverty being reduced—but actually we want it done in a meaningful way. We want legislation that is accurate; we want legislation that we know will work and actually we want the sector who was so involved with this who is so invested in improving the lives of New Zealand children—oh but no they don't have the opportunity. They are dismissed. They are patronised with a Government who continues to say and think they know best and that they don't seek or give the opportunity for input from the public whether it's those who are working on the front line those in charitable organisations those in the children's sector. No their voices don't count. I think it's a sad day in this House when there's legislation that is predominantly supported in the House and then to have an absolute sham process with a report back in eight weeks' time is disgusting—absolutely disgusting. They made this decision to do this five years ago. They didn't decide last month or the month before that or even a year ago. Actually the Prime Minister announced it a year ago—or the then Prime Minister did. I would have thought if the Prime Minister announced something like that then actually as a Minister you'd get a wriggle on and get the work done and get it delivered and into the House. But that obviously hasn't happened in this instance.So there is now a rush to the finish line to get this legislation done so that the Labour Government can say they've done something in this area and they might be in a position come election day to say they've delivered—fully implemented—one of the 42 Welfare Expert Advisory Group recommendations. Actually I'm sure the members of the expert advisory group would really like the opportunity to submit and I'm sure they'd like to have more than a week to consider it given the months and months and months of work that they put into the Welfare Expert Advisory Group. So I would say they'll be having a quiet word—or perhaps a not so quiet word—in the ear of the Minister for Social Development and now the Deputy Prime Minister about how disgraceful this policy is—sorry how disgraceful this process is—when their input their considered work is just treated so shabbily with a process like this. As I say five years ago the decision was made to support this. And while there wouldn't be any member of Parliament in this House who doesn't support the need to reduce the number of children living in poverty—and many of us actually focus on lifting children out of benefit-dependent homes because that is the bigger indicator of their lifetimes—lack of opportunity of which we have one in five children in a benefitdependent home. I'm sure our submitters would like the opportunity to contribute to this process to ensure we have good legislation instead of having a rushed process that does not take their views into consideration and we unfortunately then have a rushed process at the end so the Government is able to say—and even in the press release it's an absolute disgrace in terms of the Parliament; they've already put it in the press release what date they are going to start doing this. The absolute arrogance of that in disregarding a parliamentary process doesn't go unnoticed. I think there are unfortunately too many members opposite who have forgotten this is a Parliament this is a House of Representatives. We represent for those of us in electorates 60000-odd people and their views matter. They can sit there on the other side and smile and sneer and laugh. Actually I take that responsibility seriously and I want the opportunity for people that I represent to be able to have an input into legislation like this which as members opposite have said changes something that has been in place since the 1930s. Surely if you're changing something that's been in place since the 1930s you actually take a bit of time you get it right. But no no we just jam it through in the last piece of legislation in the final run to the election and they disregard the public of New Zealand. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The time has come for me to leave the House for the dinner break. The House will resume at 7 p.m.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m."