12. JUDITH COLLINS (National—Clevedon) Link to this
to the Minister for Social Development and Employment
Does he agree with the claims of his predecessor, the Hon Steve Maharey, when he described the single core benefit as a world first and the most significant reform of New Zealand’s welfare system since 1938; if so, why?
Madam SPEAKER
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Minister for Social Development and Employment) Link to this
The member has slightly misquoted my predecessor, as she is wont to do. My colleague Mr Maharey said that the changes, which included both enhanced employment services and a move to the single core benefit, were a world first and would be the most significant reforms of the New Zealand welfare system since 1938. And, yes, I do agree. The changes we are working through are quite fundamental and are progressing very well. Phase one, which concentrates on enhanced employment services, began with a new service approach, which has just been rolled out to all service centres, whereby employment support services have been extended to all clients on a voluntary basis, related to what they can do, not to what they cannot, and on client needs, not on the name of any benefits they may be entitled to. The Social Security Amendment Bill, which is currently before Parliament, and which the National Party opposes, completes phase one by ensuring that clients who need employment support get the support they need. The bill will also align some rules and criteria for access to benefits in preparation for the next phase. As the member has been informed on a number of occasions, decisions about phase two, which comes after phase one, will be the simplification of actual benefit structures and will be made in 2008.
Hon Bill EnglishI raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I suggest that perhaps you should scrutinise the answers that might be given. Our member asked a very precise question about the single core benefit. You gave permission to the Minister to give a longer answer. Most of the answer was not about the single core benefit and I feel that he has exploited your goodwill. It would be good if you indicated to the House that any answer that is long has to answer the question, not some question that he wished was asked.
I thank the member. I listened very carefully and the Minister was giving a very full explanation of the various phases of the single core benefit, as I heard it.
Why is the Minister this week describing the single core benefit as “just renaming benefit categories”, when his predecessor, Steve Maharey, said in February 2005 that the Government was now ready for the next step, and that it was replacing the raft of benefits, rules, and entitlements with a single core benefit for all working-age clients?
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE Link to this
Once again, sadly, the member completely misrepresents the statements I have made. I said, in fact, if she would like to consult Hansard and the documents I have released, that these changes are not simply about renaming benefits.
If, as the Minister told Parliament on Tuesday, Cabinet still needs to decide on the single core benefit, why did Steve Maharey unveil it as policy on 24 February 2005, and why did the Labour Party campaign to “introduce a core benefit for working-age beneficiaries”?
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE Link to this
Any objective assessment of what Mr Maharey said on 22 February, and the subsequent mystification coming from that member, will leave people in no doubt about what the actual situation is. I would say, though, that I am mystified, after repeated answers in this House, at the inability—or incapacity—of that member to understand these explanations. I know she and the select committee have been extensively briefed about these matters by the Ministry of Social Development. It may be that she missed out on that briefing, because I know she has a poor attendance record at the select committee—
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE Link to this
—but I am happy to offer that member a further briefing on this matter.
Is the Minister now telling the House that when in January 2005—[ Interruption] I say to Dr Cullen that we would have to prise him away from it first—Helen Clark described a single universal benefit in this way: “It’s very close to coming to a head.”, did she really mean it; and why does he not just admit that Labour has given up and abandoned the single core benefit that we told Labour would not work?
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE Link to this
What I am telling the House is that that Opposition can be assured that this Government will keep driving the changes that have led to a reduction of unemployment from 161,000, when those idiots were in power, to around 25,000 now.
Who is telling the truth—is it Helen Clark, who announced at her post-Cabinet press conference on 14 February 2005 that Cabinet had approved plans for a new single core benefit, or is it the Minister, who told Parliament this week that Cabinet still needs to make that decision?
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE Link to this
I repeat for at least the fifth time in the House this week that the first phase of implementation of these changes is already in place, and when Mrs Collins has the unfortunate circumstances of needing to go to Work and Income for support, she will find those services available to her.
I seek the leave of the House to table the Dominion article from 17 July 2000 headed “Universal benefits on cards for 2002”.
I seek leave to table the Dominion article headed “Government plans universal benefit by 2002”, dated 18 July 2000.