Upston LouiseHon LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō): Thank you Madam Chair. The speaker before me Jan Logie seems to be a little confused about principles in the bill. The principles are in Part 1 which is what we are debating in this committee of the whole House. The committee of the whole House is an important stage to be able to look at proposed changes both from the select committee process and of course Supplementary Order Papers (SOPs) that are tabled. My colleague Simon O'Connor has a Supplementary Order Paper on Part 1 that he will speak to shortly so I won't steal his thunder.When there is a substantial Supplementary Order Paper tabled by the Minister to the degree that's been tabled just over a week ago it actually does require and good governance should allow scrutiny other than only this opportunity here in the Chamber. But in terms of the principles in clause 4 I think the speaker before me didn't understand how the principles of the bill work. One of them says (d) people for whom work is not appropriate should be supported in accordance with this Act:". There is no disagreement with that. There is absolutely no disagreement. Absolutely people who need to be supported should be and I don't think there'd be any New Zealander that would dispute that.It also says and principle (a) states "work in paid employment offers the best opportunity for people to achieve social and economic well-being:". That is the first principle. That is the first principle that's stated. The speaker before me started to go off on a complete tangent about the fact that the Government wouldn't be able to support people with disabilities so I'm not quite sure where the member has gone with that.What I do want to say and I think it's important for this committee to recall this is in the departmental report of this legislation when it was in the Social Services Committee—and it's a pity it's not returning—the departmental report really quite clearly stated Labour's and the Greens' view of this legislation so I'm somewhat surprised that the member who's resumed her seat wasn't focused on those issues. Also one of the areas that both Labour and the Greens seemed to talk about—and this was an opportunity to put that talk into action—was about placing the well-being of children at the forefront of everything the Government does. Yet there was an opportunity to do that with this legislation that they've just allowed to completely slip past.When we talk about—and yeah I accept it will be uncomfortable for members opposite—families who are in long-term welfare dependency some of those families have significant challenges in areas of dysfunction. By having a principle here that is actually about providing front-line staff—providing Work and Income and the Ministry of Social Development (MSD)—a greater ability to respond to the needs—Jan Logie: Are they social workers?Hon LOUISE UPSTON: —the greater ability to respond to the need—I'm sorry but the Greens member has just suggested that front-line MSD staff aren't trained and wouldn't be able to do this job effectively. It probably echoes actually the Minister's own complaining and criticism of front-line staff and the decisions they make which I quite frankly think is embarrassing. The Minister should be supporting her staff first and foremost.But this principle that the Arden-Peters Government is removing in this SOP is the ability for front-line staff to respond to the needs of some of the most complex cases they deal with. The Children's Commissioner talks about 10 percent of the children in New Zealand who come from and have incredible difficulties. Some of their parents some of their caregivers are the very parents that we are talking about and trying to support in principle (e) in this legislation and so it is very surprising that the Minister would get rid of an opportunity to provide greater levels of assistance to those very families and their children."