Simpson Scott; Tolley AnneHon SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): Well thank you Madam Speaker. It seems to be a night for all-round consensus and bonhomie. James Shaw the Minister who has just resumed his seat is usually better known for giving a long detailed thorough analysis of the issues that relate to his portfolio areas so it's kind of a treat and almost a shame to have him speak for such a short time on such an important bill. I take the point that he wants to make which is that he doesn't want to delay the passage of this legislation any longer than it already has been but that's actually been the problem for the Government. It's that this bill has been delayed. It's something that should and could have been remedied much sooner than is currently the case. I like a number of other speakers on this side of the House didn't have the privilege or opportunity to sit on the Social Services and Community Committee and hear submissions on the bill. But I accept and acknowledge the gracious comments that have been made about the chair of that committee Gareth Hughes who is at the pinnacle of his political career in terms of his parliamentarian role of chairing that committee and it's such a shame that he in fact didn't get an opportunity to take a ministerial responsibility as the longest-serving Green MP in the Chamber. So putting that to one side I do want to just endorse the comments that others have made tonight about the benefits that will accrue from this omnibus bill passing through the House. My electorate of the Coromandel is not only beautiful and large but it has an age demographic that is skewed very much in favour of the 65-plus age group. In fact at the last general election Coromandel had the largest number of voters in the 65-plus age group enrolled out of any electorate in the country. Over my time as the member of Parliament for Coromandel it's fair to say that I've had more than my fair share of constituent inquiries around some of the matters that are addressed in this bill. I notice that it's predicted that in terms of the correction of the spousal deduction issue it's expected that something like 450 superannuitants in the 2022-23 year will no longer have their entitlement to New Zealand superannuation or the veteran's pension reduced because of their partner's overseas pension and there have been times when I've been sure that actually all 450 of those people must have resided in my electorate because these are people who feel very passionately about the wrong that has been done to them. They feel very strongly that they have been ill-treated that the system doesn't treat them fairly that they are being disadvantaged and that they are people generally who have been—well in fact always in my experience—good citizens and who have been contributing citizens whether it's been in New Zealand or during periods of time when they've worked overseas and maybe have contributed to the voluntary schemes of superannuation that are set up in most countries these days. Some of the most harrowing conversations I've had as a constituent MP have been in trying to explain the provisions of the existing law in relation to this area to people who just feel that they're being hard-done-by and that the system is agin them. I've felt very sorry for them because actually the system has been agin them and it has been unfair and it has been inequitable and those people feel very disgruntled. So I'm hopeful that when the Parliament passes this legislation those people will feel that a wrong has been righted—probably later than it should have been but it will be righted none the less—and that's a very good thing. I remember particularly a constituent case where a partner in a relationship had had an international career with a multinational company. In the period of time that this person had worked during their working life they had I think worked in something like 16 different countries being stationed with this multinational company doing good work. In each of the countries that this person was doing work in they had contributed to the various superannuation schemes in that country and trying to unwind with the Ministry of Social Development the complicated maze of contributions that that person had made during their professional and working life was a nightmare—an absolute nightmare. It should not have been that difficult it should not have been that hard and it was just wrong that we actually treated somebody who was a New Zealand citizen who had made contributions during their working and professional life in a positive correct and appropriate way thinking that they were making provision for their retirement thinking that they were doing the right thing—and then when it came to returning to New Zealand they actually got financially penalised. That was wrong it is wrong and I'm very very pleased that it's now going to be corrected. So I say to the 450 people in my electorate for whom this is an issue that help is on the way. So that's a good thing. But there are a couple of other aspects of this bill that also appeal to me and that I think are important in terms of writing somewhat smaller wrongs. One of them funnily enough also relates to my electorate where not only do I have a beautiful and large electorate with an age demographic that is skewed to the 65-pluses but we have a very high percentage of people who occupy and live in mobile homes in my electorate. They choose to do that because it's a nice part of the country to be living in and doing those sorts of things and they can move their mobile home around and they can come around. Hamish Walker: And because of the MP. Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: Most of them—actually yes. My colleague Hamish Walker is correct: many of them come of course absolutely for the quality of parliamentary representation and I'm sure that that is a motivating factor for—Hon Kris Faafoi: Perhaps that's why they're mobile. Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: —many of their decisions. They choose to come from all sorts of electorates. [Interruption] They choose to come from places as far afield as Mt Roskill and Palmerston North no less. In fact we have a big number that come from Palmerston North and they say The reason I've come to the Coromandel is the quality of parliamentary representation. I've left Palmerston North and I've left Mt Roskill and I choose to come to Coromandel." Well they come in their droves. They come in their droves in their mobile homes across the Kōpū Bridge at night in the dark by the moonlight sometimes to come to the beautiful Coromandel. Here they come and this bill rights a wrong in terms of their access to the entitlements that have been available to other people who might for instance already live in a flat or a granny flat or in a hotel or a motel or a boarding house or in units or in a caravan park but for some bizarre reason mobile home dwellers have been exempt. Well as is the case with the spousal deduction help is on the way and this is a very very good thing. So I say to those people who tonight are probably on the road in their mobile homes heading from places like Mt Roskill and Palmerston North—there'll be people coming from all around the countryside heading towards the Coromandel coming for the quality of parliamentary representation—and they'll be saying "I'll be able to get the appropriate and sensible contribution to my superannuation." So for that reason and that reason alone and forgetting all the other good reasons the National Party will be supporting this legislation. We think it's a good piece of legislation and our only real criticism is that the Minister who is not well-known for her speed and alacrity has taken so long to do it. But I guess that in the dying throes of this Government's administration we should be thankful for small mercies and at least she's roused herself into some kind of movement tonight under urgency and is progressing this bill in the dying throes of this Government's administration. We support the bill. DEPUTY SPEAKER: This is a split call."