King Annette: Social Security (Long-term Residential Care—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
King Annette: Social Security (Long-term Residential Care—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 24 May 2012. Volume:680;Page:2529. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Labour—Rongotai) 
: 
 I would really appreciate the Minister in the chair the Hon Paula Bennett answering three questions: why have we got this policy why now and why is it being imposed retrospectively? Because from our position on this side of the House this is a sneaky grubby little move by a money-grubbing Government; a dirty little secret that it kept right up until it tabled the Social Security (Long-term Residential Care—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill in this House to be passed under urgency with no consultation with the public of New Zealand particularly older New Zealanders. It is a nasty little secret that it did not have the fortitude to tell New Zealanders about before this Budget. Why not? Why did it not have the fortitude to tell the older people of New Zealand? Why not consult with Grey Power ask an organisation that represents hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders whether it supported this move? 
Well I can tell the people who are listening that this measure will be the thin end of the wedge for older New Zealanders because I have seen it all before. It was National that brought in asset testing. It was National that made promises to older New Zealanders and broke them. And now we have it bringing back a sneaky little deal to undermine services and support for older New Zealanders and doing it under urgency with no consultation. 
 Maybe those who are listening would also like to know that the Rates Rebate Scheme has been frozen in this Budget. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: What! 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Yes its funding has been frozen in this Budget. The Government did not tell the public about that. They might like to know that there will be no funding to tell people about the Rates Rebate Scheme. Keep them in the dark do not tell the older folk that there is something that could help them—keep it hidden. That is the thin end of the wedge for me. This is an agenda that is going to attack those who are the most vulnerable. As you heard from Ruth Dyson who was the Minister who introduced the legislation that changed the regime for asset testing so that it could be phased out over a period of time older people in New Zealand are staying in rest homes on average for 18 months. It was not that long ago that people going into rest homes could be there for between 8 years and 10 years. Today they stay longer at home—without the support they ought to have; it has been cut—and they spend a very short time in rest homes. This Government in a sneaky way wants to penalise them. 
I also want to say what a superficial regulatory impact statement we received from the Ministry of Health. I am incredibly disappointed with the regulatory impact statement. If you read the first page of it is the Government worried about older people? No the first thing it is worried about is making sure it will not “impose significant additional cost on business” it will not “impair their property rights” or the “market competition” and it will provide only “minor costs” on providers because they have to inform patients. Where in the front of this regulatory impact statement is concern about the older people? Why is it about business? Have those members become so devoid of care about the people in this society that when they write a regulatory impact statement it has more to do with about how it suits business than it does about older people? 
Then you look at the consultation. What consultation took place on this bill? Well the Ministry of Health talked to itself. It talked to the Ministry of Social Development and Treasury. But of course it had to maintain Budget secrecy over this. We are talking about $4.5 million in the first year. The ministry said that it had to have Budget secrecy over that and that was why it could not consult. That is a nonsense. It could have gone out and found out how it affected people. Then when you look to see whether there is going to be any monitoring evaluation or review of it you see that no there is going to be none at all. There is going to be no look to see what impact this measure has on older New Zealanders. 
I am incredibly disappointed in this Government once again attacking the most vulnerable of people our older people who by the very fact that they are in a rest home are vulnerable. They are not there unless they really are in the final twilight years of their lives. Then for the Government to bring in this measure under urgency secretly is despicable—despicable. On this side of the House we oppose the way that the Government is going about it. This is not what you do to New Zealanders who have worked so hard in their lives to support the rest of us.