Chadwick Steve: Social Security Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Chadwick Steve: Social Security Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:639;Page:8973] 
STEVE CHADWICK (Labour—Rotorua) 
: 
 What a sad speech that was from the member of the Opposition who does not even take account of the number of people in this country whom we are proud of: beneficiaries who have moved into work. It is great as a Government to be able to go out there and say: “Well done and we’ve got more work to do.”. We know that on this side of the House. I shall hold up this graph so that all members can see the stunning decline in the number of New Zealanders who are receiving a benefit since this Labour-led coalition came into Government in 1999. 
I think the Social Security Amendment Bill the title of which does not say much about the bill itself at least holds on to the fundamental tenets of a social security system and provides a social benefit net for all those people who genuinely need a benefit at different phases of their life. We keep proud to that brand but this bill launches a new approach in terms of the way we work alongside and with beneficiaries. 
I will just mention the unemployment figures in Rotorua. The Government is getting good coverage at home because that is one of our good news stories. We used to talk about youth crime truancy and the problems of vagrancy and that was all because so many people were unemployed doing nothing and getting up to mischief. Well our jobless figures at home are really impressive. We have only 1182 locals in the Rotorua electorate who are receiving the unemployment benefit. That is a 27-year low. I will not accept the Opposition’s claim that we have done nothing and are benefiting from a booming economy that is humming along. The improvement has happened because of an active hands-on approach by the Ministry of Social Development and the fantastic work done locally along with youth transitions programmes—principals at schools identifying young people who want to leave school and go on to school-based training apprenticeships or university careers or to get some good in-work training. 
Our figures are very impressive. In 1999 4769 people were on the unemployment benefit. No one can tell me that reducing that figure has not had a huge impact on our community in Rotorua. It goes alongside the sense of pride that people have when they bring a cheque home and put food down on the table. That makes work pay and that has been the fundamental tenet of this Government—that people can bring home the bacon and feed their families—along with helping people through the Working for Families package. I just mention that the Opposition has an approach whereby John Key has admitted that his tax cuts would not help as many Kiwi families as the Working for Families package does. He is not really sure what he would do about that but if he scrapped Working for Families 160000 Kiwi families would be worse off than they are now. So that improvement does not happen just by chance and that is the context that I want to mention. 
We also have 500 fewer domestic purpose beneficiares than we had in 1999 and that is because of initiatives like our teen parent unit and a variety of hands-on approaches—work-ready programmes that help women to return into work after having lost confidence in their skills to get a job. Also the bill assists people with disabilities. They have always said Governments should not tell them what they cannot do but tell them and help them with what they can do. They said the Government should get in beside them get them some part-time work opportunities and work with them. I think the figures we see at home and nationally show us that the mentoring and upskilling of those who were previously on a benefit are starting to work. Making work pay and having that more aggressive approach to getting people off a benefit—those who genuinely work—is a wonderful approach. 
Because there are so many fewer beneficiaries we are noticing that staff are now undertaking work training that they did not have the time for when the number of beneficiaries meant it was like working in a processing unit. So 112 offices right throughout New Zealand have completed their training in readiness for the introduction of the key aspects of this legislation. We are seeing a fantastic approach today. We do need a flexible approach and some aspects of this bill give us a little flexibility especially in areas like Rotorua. We have a lot of forestry workers on contract work and when suddenly the contract is over they have a stand-down period of 10 weeks which is too long until they can get out and seek other work. I have had Work and Income come out to the tiny village of Kaingaroa which is full of forestry workers work with those workers and say that as soon as their contract has expired they should let the ministry know. Staff have told those workers that Work and Income will come in beside them that the stand-down period would be only 2 weeks and that the ministry would either get them back into training or help them to pick up another contract. 
So this bill is about putting in the right services around people at the right place and at the right time getting a working New Zealand and putting New Zealanders on their feet. The bill also heralds a second phase as we get into a more targeted approach to those on a benefit. It is about simplifying the benefit. I have often heard the Opposition ask when the Minister is going to bring in a simplified benefit. We are flagging today that that is the next phase after this amendment bill which is focused on service delivery and removing the barriers to work. Next year we will see that more simplified approach to the benefit. 
I congratulate the Social Services Committee on the work it did on this bill. We looked at it very well as a committee. One good thing is the application process. It is much much smarter. It was never set out in the legislation before which always resulted in a lack of clarity and transparency in that area. It is also quite a complex area so I think it is good to have it in the law. In the past we have had to rely on case law to interpret policy. So it is great to have that specificity in the bill. I think it is also great to know about the period of residency—for 2 years—for all benefits. That makes the situation much simpler. Removing the qualifying child criteria for the domestic purposes benefit and the widows benefit and extending the definition of hospital care which used to work in the past out into new types of residential care—those are all amendments that may seem small but to beneficiaries having to go on to a benefit when it is necessary they will be helpful. It think this is a great bill. It will take us to the next step in getting New Zealanders out of the philosophy that the dole was an opt-in solution and into work.