7. Question No. 7—Social Development and EmploymentRICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green) to the Minister for Child Poverty ReductionQuestion No. 7—Social Development and Employment7. RICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green) to the Minister for Child Poverty Reduction: Why has she made the choice to set child poverty targets for 2026/27 which would mean that approximately 17000 more children experience material hardship than under the 2023/2024 target?Hon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Child Poverty Reduction): Because actual child poverty rates worsened under the last Government in the 2023 year which means the new intermediate targets have to account for the fact that progress in reducing child poverty is miles behind what was forecast when the last Government originally established the targets. The actual number of children living in material hardship increased by 23400 in 2022-23. According to the after housing cost measure which is most closely connected to material hardship Budget 2024 is forecast to see 17000 fewer children in poverty. Our Government has a plan—including tax relief FamilyBoost breaking cycles of welfare dependency improving educational outcomes—to help children overcome the circumstances they are born into and reduce hardship. Ricardo Menéndez March: Has she set weaker child poverty reduction targets because she will plunge more children into material hardship with her choice to cut benefit increases and to inflict more punitive sanctions on beneficiaries? Hon LOUISE UPSTON: No I'm not sure the member listened to my answer. The number of children living in material hardship while we would like to say it didn't went up under the last Government. So what we have now is a worse position in which to try and reduce the numbers. That's why we've set a target that is both ambitious but importantly achievable. Ricardo Menéndez March: How can she say her target is ambitious when it is allowing material hardship to increase over the next few years?Hon LOUISE UPSTON: The member hasn't realised the point is we have to set a target based on what the reality is today. And what the reality is is an increased number of children—23400 more—living in material hardship because of the last Government's record. We've set a target that is ambitious and achievable because we want to see fewer children in material hardship.Ricardo Menéndez March: How many kids could she have lifted out of poverty if the Government chose to spend $2.9 billion on benefit increases instead of tax cuts on landlords?Hon LOUISE UPSTON: What we have done in Budget '24—and I'm really proud of the work that's been done—is to focus on the cost of living crisis that affects those households on the lowest incomes the harshest; it affects those the worst. So we are focused on material hardship we are focused on the cost of living crisis and we are focused on supporting households into work that will lift their incomes and their opportunities.Ricardo Menéndez March: How can she stand by that statement when her own official advice has shown that cuts to benefit increases will result in more children living in poverty?Hon LOUISE UPSTON: There's no cuts to benefit increases. We have changed the way future increases are allocated. And Budget '24 will lift 17000 fewer children out of poverty.Ricardo Menéndez March: Is she ashamed of her weak child poverty targets and if not why did she fail to engage with stakeholder organisations about them and neglect to announce them with a press release?Hon LOUISE UPSTON: We have set intermediate targets that prove our Government is focused on reducing child poverty results dealing with the unfortunate reality of what we inherited from the previous Government where the numbers have gone up but we're just getting on and doing the job which is why Budget '24 will lift 17000 children out of poverty.