Davidson MaramaHon MARAMA DAVIDSON (Co-Leader—Green): If that previous New Zealand First member Tanya Unkovich would in fact have stopped reading her notes and instead read the evidence—and how about reading her own Prime Minister's state of the nation speech right after she tried to say that we need to improve people's self-esteem and this very legislation that is going to deny those on the lowest incomes more income? This very legislation and the very state of the nation speech that we just heard over the weekend from her Prime Minister is doing the opposite of improving the self-esteem of people who are struggling the most and is why we will not only be opposing and are opposing this legislation which seeks to tag income support to inflation instead of wages because that ensures that they receive less money we are opposing this legislation and the hateful rhetoric that comes with it.We saw the Minister in charge of this legislation the Hon Louise Upston repeating again in the House today—we saw her talking and using the language of people languishing" on a jobseeker benefit. Now what is that supposed to say about people who are trying their very best; trying their very best to care for their children their families their community; who know that the best thing that they can do with very little is try their best? But this Government—including that speaker who just sat down from New Zealand First the Prime Minister and the Minister in charge of this legislation—are dehumanising and stigmatising all people who receive a benefit.With all of their language they continue to talk about welfare dependency. Guess who is dependent on the current economic status in this country! People like the 311 families who together mass $85 billion collectively without being fairly taxed. We want to talk about dependency and tough choices? How about making the tough choice to lift all families out of poverty instead of ensuring that those families with more than enough—more than enough; more than they could ever want or need—continue to be disproportionately impacted positively by this very legislation?The Minister tried to say that "Oh yes this legislation on its own will in fact create more children in poverty." So even she admits that. Can I just direct that to that previous speaker? Even the Minister has said "Yes this legislation on its own will indeed cause more poverty." And then she tries to say "But with the tax cuts that is what is going to help." I would like to know exactly how many families who are struggling the most will be lifted out of poverty by those so-called tax cuts and how many families who are already dependent on the current unfair tax system are going to amass incredibly more wealth. That is the dependency that this House should be talking about.In my previous speeches I have highlighted that if this Government was serious about wanting to know how to ensure people can live decent lives the aim alone isn't just to remove people off a benefit—people who are receiving income support—the aim should be for people to live decent lives. There was a lot of work put into a report called the Welfare Expert Advisory Group. If that member who just sat down is concerned about evidence and research and work the whole report for that member to read in her spare time an entire report with the likes of—and I'll repeat this again—Phil O'Reilly previous chief executive of the Business New Zealand roundtable who sat before people who are struggling and who came to the conclusion that all of the research said they are not receiving enough; they are not receiving support to actually improve their lives.So the Greens have always posed a way and a political decision that can and should be made to ensure all families are lifted out of poverty; that we can end poverty for all families by making sure they are receiving adequate income to live decent lives. Thank you Madam Speaker."