Delahunty Catherine: Support for Children in Hardship Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDelahunty Catherine: Support for Children in Hardship Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 21 May 2015. Volume:705;Page:3531. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green): It is always interesting to reflect on wealthy people’s understanding of poverty. There is a tone that I think possibly comes from greed dependency. We hear a lot about benefit dependency but we do not acknowledge greed dependency in our country and it is quite a problem. We will be supporting this bill in its first reading to the select committee because of the 25 bucks because we cannot deprive people of that but there is still a misunderstanding of the issue when the scale of the problem is so much greater than the supposed plan and the supposed solution. I would rather not talk about mullets or anything else today; I would like to talk about the kids. Today is in some ways a victory for the amazing group effort out there in the community to make child poverty such an important issue that the Government was unable to deny it. I would like to pay tribute to people like the Child Poverty Action Group Every Child Counts the New Zealand Council of Social Services Unicef and many more and the Green Party for our leadership through Metiria Turei’s unfailing and absolutely determined commitment to make child poverty an issue that this Government could not afford to ignore in this Budget because the focus groups told it that it could not afford it.So before we get all warm-hearted about the caring Government let us just acknowledge that this campaign has achieved a small step. The step that has been achieved which is really important tonight is an acknowledgment that income matters. I have sat in this House for the last 6½ years hearing how poverty has got nothing to do with money; it is all about individuals not pulling up their own bootstraps it is all about the failure of the education system and teachers and it is all about people not grabbing opportunity. Anybody who has worked at the front line of inequalityin this country knows that income is critical. The Government has been forced to give 25 bucks more a week after 43 years. I am not the world’s greatest mathematician but anyone can tell that that is not going to be enough after 43 years of Governments failing to lift the benefit. But we are not going to look this tiny little gift-pony in the mouth because actually any money in the hands of families right now is good. They need it but it is not a solution. So we would like to just acknowledge that it is not a solution; it is a tiny little step. The solutions have to be much more structural and much more generous.If we can afford the nauseating tax cuts of several Budgets ago for the wealthiest people we could actually afford to extend the in-work tax credit to the families who really need it. That would be a generous move. That would be a structural move. Instead of that we have got giving on one hand and taking from the other. On the one hand there is this extra money; on the other hand there is an increased obligation. An increased obligation is always a euphemism for going down to Work and Income for another ritual of humiliation. Those of us who have worked as beneficiary advocates are under no illusions about that experience. It is worse for the people who actually have to do it but we have witnessed it and what we have seen is desperate families including many solo parents particularly women-led families being told they are failures and that they will be sanctioned if they do not get work. In this bill they now have to have 20 hours’ work a week. No amount of description of the obligation as “Oh we’ll be flexible about this.” cuts any ice. We can sit in this House and use that language but go down to Work and Income and witness what actually happens when families with no money are forced into social obligation.Let me talk about early childhoodeducation. The Green Party has demonstrated just by reading the officials’ briefing documents that participation in early childhood education is not sufficient; it is quality. But now we are going to make parents with a 3-year-old look for more work while the children must be in early childhood education of whatever quality. Until we commit to the family-centred models that my colleague talked about like kōhanga playcentre and kindergarten which are losing families all the time we are going to be putting kids into some good services and some utterly indifferent ones. If we do not listen to the Brainwave Trust about what is important to the child in its first few years if we will not listen to the child experts if we will not listen to the Children’s Commissioner if we will not listen to Jonathan Boston who said today reading the bill that actually a number of the measures of poverty are failed under this bill and that the $25 will not make a difference—if we will not listen to those people because we are so inside our privileged little bubble of “We’ve done a nice thing today.” then we are failing the kids of this country. Kia ora tātou.