Lee MelissaMELISSA LEE (National): This is my first opportunity to speak on this particular bill. I have to say that I wasn't part of a select committee on social development or social welfare in the past and this is subject matter that I'm not very familiar with. But having actually sat in my office listening to the debate it dawned on me that I had to come down and talk about this—talk about the issue that actually matters. Thirteen thousand more people on welfare dependency is something that I baulk at—the very idea. When this Minister was introducing the Social Assistance Legislation (Budget 2019 Welfare Package) Amendment Bill I'm just trying to find out—I'd like to put a question to the Minister first. How many men are not named by the women who are actually apparently disadvantaged by the previous Government by taking some of their benefits off them as a penalty for them not naming the men who are the fathers of these children and how many more men will actually get away scot-free to be not responsible not taking the responsibility for the children after this bill is in fact passed?I'd like to commend the speaker who just sat down. The Hon Amy Adams made very very clear mention of the fact that the earlier speaker from the Green Party talked about how some women are disadvantaged whether they cannot name the fathers or they don't know who the father is but those people are carved out so they're not part of this debate. We are specifically talking about women who choose not to name the father who can be named. These are men who want to get off scot-free by not supporting their child. And I know a few of those. I'm a single mother. I'm not suggesting my child's father is one of those but I have many friends who have been single parents who have been in difficult times. I'm not one of those people who actually depended on the benefit but I do know many. I also know somebody who was born in Korea who never knew her parents who actually ended up being adopted and now lives in Sweden. She actually became the first Korean-born member of Parliament to become an EU member of Parliament. And when she could not find out who her parents were I saw how difficult it was for her. For me the right of the child who does not know their father knowing that their father never actually paid towards their welfare and the very fact that the Government cannot actually collect child support payments from the father who should rightly pay towards their child their responsibility—I think this Government is going down the wrong path making sure that men who do not want to take responsibility and the women who actually aid those men in their irresponsibility should take responsibility in my opinion. As far as I'm concerned I would like to ask as I said to the Minister how many more men will actually get off scot-free? Have the calculations been done? Did she ask the officials to do the numbers as to how much this will cost the taxpayers? How many more men and women will actually abscond from their responsibility as the Hon Amy Adams said? In order for us to make sure that children are not living in poverty—as the Minister actually tried to say that this bill tries to do that get them out of poverty. If that is so what does this actually do to that state of affairs giving them—I don't know—$6 extra a week? Does that actually lift them out of poverty? Does that actually lift them out of poverty by giving them $22 extra when this Government is taking away so much more in other taxes that they are introducing in this urgency motion?I believe that this bill goes so far away from what the Government suggests that they are trying to do: lift people out of poverty. I think this is the very difference between this Government and the potential Government that is waiting—the National Government—that we do not agree with this move and I think this is very very flawed and I do not support this bill.