Goudie Sandra: Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Goudie Sandra: Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17282] 
SANDRA GOUDIE (National—Coromandel) 
: 
 In speaking to the Social Security (Long-term Residential Care) Amendment Bill I would like to echo the words of my colleague— 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Is that because you've got her speech in front of you. 
SANDRA GOUDIE 
: No no. I say to the Minister that we do not necessarily always speak from prepared speeches. 
We know the intention of this bill and we are incredibly concerned. As members have already heard providers are getting out of residential care because they are not being supported by the current Government. One has to ask oneself why they are not being supported by the current Government. I am reminded of a press release written by Simon Carlaw. He used the words socialisation and de-privatisation to describe this Government's policy and direction. De-privatisation is exactly what the Government is going to get because residential care providers are getting out of the business. 
The Salvation Army is getting out. It is getting out of Ohinemuri an aged-care house in my electorate. It is no longer worth The Salvation Army's time and effort to go down this path when it is not supported by the current Government. That is a huge concern. What will happen? Where will those old folk go? 
The current ideology is that all those old folk will be looked after in their own homes. Well that is really fine and dandy. Who will help to look after them in their own homes? Caregivers are in crisis at the moment because they are not getting funding or support either. So what will happen to those old folk? Is this really going to cut much mustard with them? 
Yes the Government was going to scrap income and asset testing but with this bill it has allowed old folk to keep at least more of their assets. But how will that help them? What actual benefit will that be to them if they require caregivers or residential care? Who will provide those services? Will it be the Government? Hello no; I do not think so—because it is not cutting the mustard right now. It is not doing that. 
Here I have a press release from Mayor Lawrence Yule of Hastings. He is ready to go to Wellington to fight funding cuts for the elderly and disabled in Hawke’s Bay. Why is that? Because agencies there are grappling with what he states is a multimillion dollar cut in funding for the elderly and disabled. 
So I ask the Government what this bill is really doing for the elderly? The Government is just not doing anything. 
Dr Lynda Scott 
: Where is all the money going? 
SANDRA GOUDIE 
: That is a good question. That is something we find difficult to understand with this Government. The money certainly is not going into looking after the elderly. It is not going to residential care providers and it is not going to caregivers to help them to look after the elderly in their own homes. 
All we have to do is to look at the multitude of press releases about caregivers: “Low pay for caregivers blamed on woes”; the numbers are not there. “Radius polishes its services via home-help stake”; they are not there! “Qualified caregivers ‘will be sought after’ ”—why? Because they are not there. “Seminars boost for caregivers”; look there is a whole heap of hooey and no “do-ey”! There is review after review and pilot programme after pilot programme—and what is happening? Caregivers are still in crisis and old people are not getting residential care because people are getting out of the business. 
This bill does not help that in any way shape or form. Although those elderly people can retain a greater proportion of their assets it does not help them. If they cannot go into residential care provided by a private provider then will the Government provide residential care? I would think not and if it did I would be very sorry to see that day arrive. 
This bill also provides for an increase in the consumer price index. That will not go anywhere near matching compliance costs and increased costs. [ 
Interruption 
] Yes I am talking about the preliminary provisions in the bill; I understand that we are talking about Part 1 “Preliminary”. The bill does allow for an increased consumer price index but nothing is allowed for the cost of the Holidays Act—because the Government did not allow for it either. It did not assess the impact on the health and disability sector and of course there are all those other increased costs from employment occupational safety and health requirements electricity cultural sensitivity and goodness knows what else in order to meet obligations requirements and standards.