Social Assistance (Residency Qualification) Legislation Bill

I move, That the Social Assistance (Residency Qualification) Legislation Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Social Services and Community Committee to consider the bill.

This bill seeks to provide greater pension flexibility for people who wish to retire in any of the Cook Islands, Niue, Tokelau, or New Zealand. Before I get into the detail of this bill, can I acknowledge the presence of the Prime Minister of the Cook Islands, Henry Puna, and his Minister, Albert Nicholas, and other advisers and staff members from the Cook Islands. Can I also acknowledge you, Madam Assistant Speaker, as a Cook Islands member of this Parliament—

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Kia orana.

—and I also acknowledge Alfred Ngaro, from the Opposition, as a Cook Islands member from this Parliament, and my ministerial colleague Kris Faafoi, of Tokelauan descent, as a member of this Parliament as well.

This Government is committed to a Pacific reset. We have a renewed emphasis on strengthening our relationship with our Pacific neighbours. This renewed emphasis is, in a small but meaningful way, reflected in this bill. Yesterday, the Prime Minister of the Cook Islands, the Rt Hon Henry Puna, described the connection between New Zealand and the Cook Islands as an enduring, evolving, and living partnership. Under this Government, we will continue to evolve and grow together with our Pacific neighbours, based on a partnership of equals.

I see this much-needed and long-time-coming piece of legislation as honouring this special partnership between New Zealand and the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau. This Government wants to make sure that those countries and territories that have close constitutional ties with New Zealand are recognised, and that their ongoing economic and social viability is supported. We also want to ensure that New Zealanders who meet the relevant visa and immigration requirements can have other options for where they spend their retirement.

This bill allows the requirement that a person can meet their requirements of five years’ residence and presence after the age of 50 in New Zealand for superannuation, with residence and presence in either New Zealand, the Cook Islands, Niue, or Tokelau, or any combination of those countries and that territory.

The change is restricted to the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau because this bill is about recognising New Zealand’s close constitutional relationships with these Pacific Islands, and reflects our push for stronger and more aspirational partnerships between New Zealand and these Pacific Islands. Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau are part of the Realm of New Zealand, which means that they enjoy shared citizenship with New Zealand and unique legal arrangements. Both the Cook Islands and Niue have adopted constitutions enabling self-government and free association with New Zealand, so they can administer their own affairs. Tokelau is a non-selfgoverning territory of New Zealand.

Current pension portability arrangements allow people to take their New Zealand superannuation to one of 22 Pacific countries and territories, including the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau. This special portability arrangement is designed to recognise the contribution Pacific peoples make to New Zealand and the inability of Pacific countries and territories to fulfil the reciprocal obligations necessary to conclude social security agreements with New Zealand. There are currently nearly 400 people receiving their New Zealand superannuation and veterans pension in the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau, and over 300 of those people live in the Cook Islands.

Before 2015, a person would have to be resident and present in New Zealand on the date of application in order to be eligible under the special portability arrangement. However, an amendment introduced in 2015 means that people resident in the Cook Islands, Niue, or Tokelau can now apply for New Zealand superannuation or the veterans pension from the Islands, rather than needing to be resident and present in New Zealand at the time of their application. Applicants, though, were still required to be 65 years or over and to have lived in New Zealand for 10 years since the age of 20 and five years since the age of 50, in fulfilment of the other requirements of superannuation and veterans pension.

The intent of this change was to remove a disincentive for people to return to the Cook Islands, Niue, or Tokelau to live. However, the change has had a smaller take-up than expected. It is now evident that the 2015 change, while removing some disincentives for skilled people to return to the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau during their working lives, did not achieve the desired effect of encouraging people to move back to and remain in those countries.

The overall principle of the five years over 50 residence requirement that comes with superannuation and the veterans pension entitlements continues to be preserved in this bill, and requirements remain about overall residency of at least 10 years in New Zealand after the age of 20. This means that somebody must have at least had a recent connection with the Cook Islands, Niue, Tokelau, or New Zealand before they can get New Zealand superannuation or veterans pension, which could not be achieved by simply removing the five years over 50 residence requirement for people applying from the Cook Islands, Niue, or Tokelau.

The proposals in this bill have come about due to concerns raised by the Governments of the Cook Islands and Niue about the current five years over age 50 residence requirement. They considered that the five over 50 residence requirement was deterring skilled people from returning and contributing to their countries and territory. They were also concerned that the five years over 50 residence requirement may induce some people to return to New Zealand in order to ensure that they will be able to claim New Zealand superannuation or veterans pension later on, and the concern was that that was the only reason for returning to New Zealand at that point.

This bill is about supporting the economic and social viability of the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau. Depopulation, and its related social and economic consequences, is a longstanding issue for these islands. The current five years over 50 residence requirement has been described as a disincentive for Cook Islanders, Niueans, and Tokelauans to remain in their employment and to participate in their community after having lived in New Zealand.

We all, in this House, know the importance of family, particularly in later life. This bill helps to maintain family and community ties in these Pacific Islands by enabling older people to stay with their family without losing access to superannuation or the veterans pension. There is also concern that people would leave important positions which contribute to the economy and society to return to New Zealand to gain the five years residence in New Zealand over the age of 50. Removing this disincentive would potentially help boost economic development and human resource capacity by allowing highly skilled people to continue contributing to their communities in these Pacific Islands after the age of 50, and be entitled to New Zealand’s superannuation and veterans pension by using residence in the Cook Islands, Niue, Tokelau, and New Zealand to qualify.

This change will not be restricted to New Zealand citizens of the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau; other New Zealanders who qualify for New Zealand superannuation and veterans pension will be able to make use of the provision, should they meet the relevant migration and visa criteria in the Cook Islands, Niue, or Tokelau and choose to reside there. I thought I should clarify this, because I have people in my office thinking that at the age of 50 they could just automatically move to the Cook Islands, and that’s not the case.

The economic implications of the bill for New Zealand are relatively low. The increase in New Zealand superannuation and veterans pension costs in the first complete fiscal year, in 2019-20, is estimated to be $3.5 million, rising to $4.3 million by 2022-23.

There are a range of indirect economic benefits and savings that may be derived by New Zealand from the proposal. The potential benefits include increased economic activity in the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau—as I mentioned earlier—leading to a reduction in remittance payments and, potentially, private transfers from New Zealand. Savings could also be accrued as a result of a lesser burden on some of the New Zealand Government - funded services, as has been highlighted by the Cook Islands and Niue Governments themselves. These benefits are difficult to quantify, however, and would depend on the response to the new arrangements.

Officials have tried to estimate how many people might benefit from the new arrangement. The proposal is estimated to result in an additional 174 people receiving New Zealand super and the veterans pension in the first complete fiscal year of operation, in 2019-20, rising to 204 people in 2022-23. While those are relatively small numbers, in the context of the very small populations of Niue and Tokelau, in particular, which each have populations of less than 1,500 people, the implications of the bill are significant for those countries and territories.

I want to acknowledge the vital role, in bringing this bill together, that our Pacific neighbours have played not only in New Zealand but, can I also say, the role that our Pacific neighbours play on the global stage. We have a unique relationship with the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau, and that is something to cherish. With this bill, this Government shows our commitment to evolving and growing our partnership together as a response to the concerns and needs that have been raised with us. I want to thank the Cook Island Government for being present in the House today, and I look forward to progressing this bill further. Meitaki.

Thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker. Can I, first of all, say and declare thank you for the speech from the Hon Carmel Sepuloni, because the National Party will be supporting this bill. We see this as a bill that is of great importance and also signifies the relationship that we have.

Can I, first of all, also acknowledge the Hon Henry Puna, who’s here—the Prime Minister of the Cook Islands—and also too Her Excellency, Teremoana Yala. Thank you for being here. Kia orana korua no tei tere mai ki roto i te Paremata no Aotearoa. Madam Assistant Speaker Williams, can I also acknowledge you, as a fellow Kiwi of Cook Islands descent as well. Today’s a day that’s a proud day. We can see a piece of legislation that benefits not only us here in New Zealand but also our descendants back home and our families back home as well, in the three nations of the Realm—that’s the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau.

The special relationship has been signified. The honourable Prime Minister Puna is here today, when he was meant to be at a cocktail function up in Auckland. I know because I received the invitation, and when I saw him today he said that, actually, the other Ministers could attend to that, but it’s important that he be here today for this piece of legislation. So can I acknowledge your presence here.

It was also you, Prime Minister Puna, who came here back in 2015, along with the Premier of Niue, Toke Talagi. When I was chairing the Social Services Committee, we talked about the portability of the pension, back in 2015. I thank you, because you came, and I’m sure that would be one of the few occasions where the head of a nation—the Prime Minister himself, and, in this case the Premier and Prime Minister—came to a New Zealand select committee to present a submission. When you presented the submission you first of all acknowledged the fact that this had begun. I want to acknowledge—and you acknowledged—the Hon Murray McCully. The conversations have been long, but there came a point where it was time to actually act upon this and put this through.

So you acknowledged the portability of the pension and, in this case, the Social Assistance (Residency Qualification) Legislation Bill, but you also petitioned the aspect of the 10- and five-year rule, which is now before us in this bill—and it’s to remove that five-year rule. Your petition to us, if I can remember quite clearly, was that in order to ensure that we address the issue of depopulation back in all the nations of the Realm, it was important that we have the ability for our people who’ve come here—who’ve worked here for many years and have been present in the country—to come back and to contribute both socially, economically, and culturally back to the nation as well. So I want to acknowledge and honour you for your passion and your advocacy at that time, because I believe that’s also led us to where we are here today as well.

I want to acknowledge the current Government of the day, who’ve continued to take that on, as the advocacy was, so let’s now remove the five years. So what it intentionally says is that those from those three nations of the Realm—those that are of Cook Island, Niue, and Tokelau descent—can return home. They can actually bring something back to those local economies, those local communities as well, and I think that’s significantly important to what we’re hearing in our communities.

If I think back, there were times when we’d think, “What is the contribution of Pacific peoples?”, and I want to acknowledge that we’ve now been able to highlight the significant contribution back in World War I. It was two or three years ago when we were acknowledging the centenary celebrations—New Zealand’s 100 years. And all the way into that we realised that, actually, we had a part to play: Pasifika people were represented. I want to acknowledge the 147 Niue soldiers that were represented back in World War I, and the almost 500 Cook Islands soldiers that were represented. There were also members from Samoa, from Tokelau, and also from Tonga as well. In all, they say, in World War I there would have been approximately 1,000 Pacific people that were represented—that fought for the country, and, yes, under British rule, but because they believed it was important to make a contribution.

I mentioned that because part of what we’re talking about today is honouring the contribution that Pasifika people have made to New Zealand. It’s only fair that this bill is not only dealing with those in regards to the superannuation but also those who’ve been veterans. That’s why I want to acknowledge the veterans’ contribution—those who’ve made that contribution many times.

In fact, I see my good colleague and friend here, the Hon Peeni Henare. It was only last year when we had the re-enactment of the first Rarotongan contingent who were here in 1917. It was actually in this Chamber where were had Papa Te Poave who came along. His father was part of the 45 that were there. I want to acknowledge the Hon Peeni Henare, because on behalf of his grandfather, who was there at that time as Minister, he actually had the mihi towards them. It was a powerful, it was an emotional, and it was a spiritual moment because, again, it recognised the contribution that our Pasifika people make.

So I’m proud here today to acknowledge the importance of this. Because what this bill does is it is acknowledging, in a way, the contribution not only from the past but even in the present, for those who’ve contributed 10 years or more can now return back into the Pacific nations, into those Realm countries, and contribute back as well.

The special issues that are here are that there are three different types of superannuation in New Zealand. There’s the reciprocal social security agreement, and there’s the special portability and the general portability. This particular piece of legislation comes under the special portability. That’s important, again. It recognises the relationship, but it means that, again, those who’ve been here and have contributed to society over 10 years, before turning 50, can now return back. What we’ve heard time and time again is that that’s made a difference into those nations—contributing into their villages, giving back to their families as well, and I think that’s going to be important.

Prime Minister Puna, you also, yesterday, in the old legislative chamber—in fact, just parallel to here—talked about the importance of graduation. I want to acknowledge that because, when we see our Pacific nations, the only way that we can graduate, that we can mature, that we can move on is when we have the opportunities to grow the economy, but also to bring back those who’ve been the diaspora—that is what we call them: Cook Islanders who’ve lived abroad, who’ve gained some experience and expertise, and Niueans and Tokelauans, who can come back then and make their contribution.

I want to thank you for that, because I think that truly is a statement of leadership in our Pacific nations—to say that even as small Pacific nations we can have a contribution, that we can move from a sense of dependency, and even though, as nations of the Realm you are self-governing and in free association, it’s truly a mark of leadership and maturity when as small Pacific nations we desire to actually graduate and move from a sense of dependency as well.

Inside of that, I know that one of the questions that I asked from the floor yesterday was about how we can grow that connectivity. Previously, we used to have an overseas seat. You, Prime Minister Puna, in true form and in humour, said, “Well, what we do is that we supplant Cook Islanders into the New Zealand Parliament.” I want to acknowledge the Assistant Speaker here as well. I think that what you, Prime Minister Puna, were also alluding to is that there are a number of Cook Islanders, Niueans, and Tokelauans who have succeeded and have done well in our society. If I think about it, it was only just last week that we were there to welcome Adrian Orr, who is now the Governor of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand, and that is quite a significant role. Even though he is from Atiu descent—well, you can’t all be perfect; he’s not from Aitutaki, Mangaia, or Pukapuka; that’s OK—but what’s more important is that he’s a Cook Islander that’s able to be in position of influence. And there are many others.

I hope that what this bill will do is it will encourage more of our Pasifika people to say that with the experience that they have learnt, with the expertise that they can offer, they will return home.

I know that the Hon Carmel Sepuloni and I and others were on the Pacific Mission, and when we were in Niue, why I was really encouraged was that there were a number of young people and families who said, “We’re coming back home. We’re coming back home because we believe that our countries are a better place to raise our children. It’s a way of connecting back to our families and to our villages.” So already we see that people are returning back. This piece of legalisation, I believe, is another way of creating a pathway that will not only encourage it but will also enable that ability as well. Because for a number of them, they often say that what holds them back from returning is the fact of their parents. Now they’ll have the ability to be able to support their parents as they return back.

The legislation will mean that they no longer need to be present or resident in Aotearoa, in New Zealand; they can actually continue to be living and working and contributing back in those nations of the Realm, and that becomes significantly important as well. So, Madam Assistant Speaker, can I say that it’s a proud day to be able to speak to this bill. I know that, for you and I, we are proud to be able to see that many, not only in the Cook Islands but in Niue and Tokelau, will see this bill as significant, and, more importantly, something that we join right across the House in supporting. We support this piece of legislation to the House.

Now, before I call the honourable member on the next call, I just want to make clear that although the previous speaker, the Hon Alfred Ngaro, did make mention of the chair in his speech, I know that he was referring to the presence in the gallery of the Hon Henry Puna, the Prime Minister of the Cook Islands, and the delegation that’s there. So I was lenient towards you, but I would encourage members in their contributions to ensure that they do not bring the Speaker into the debate.

Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. Ka noho ahau ki roto i taku Reo Māori mō te wāhanga tuatahi o taku kōrero. Ko te kī atu ahau ki a koutou e Tākitimu waka, tōia mai rā ki runga i ngā wai kapakapa o Aotearoa e hora ake nei. Tōia mai rā e Aotea waka ki runga i Te Whare Pāremata e tū nei. Tōia mai rā ko Ārai-te-Uru ki runga i tō tatou Whare e tū nei. E mihi atu ana ki a koutou—haere mai, haere mai, tēnā rā koutou katoa.

[Thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker. I shall stay in my Māori language for the first part of my speech. Let me say to you who hail from the great canoe of Tākitimu, haul (your canoe) across the rippling waters of New Zealand which surround us. To you from the great canoe of Aotea, haul (your canoe) to Parliament. To you from the great canoe of Ārai-te-Uru, haul (your canoe) to this House which belongs to us all. Warm greetings to you all. Welcome, welcome, welcome. I acknowledge you all.]

Thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker. Can I—after my mihi of course—just talk about some of those connections, as was referred to by the Hon Alfred Ngaro in his contribution to this particular bill, because I believe those are really important—not just the matters of this bill but in terms of our enduring and evolving relationship with our relatives from the Pacific Islands. I say “relatives” because according to my whakapapa we come from the same canoe, and I think that’s important because the honourable member, the Hon Alfred Ngaro, talked about the brotherhood that’s stood side by side in World War I. We know too that they stood side by side as part of D Company of the 28th Māori Battalion in World War II. So it’s only right we acknowledge our history.

I believe that it is that particular history that has led to this bill, which has taken some time, but we are here today. I also take the point made by members who have contributed to this bill about the possibilities and the prospects for the future, and that’s exciting, and I want to touch on all three of those.

We know now for many years in Aotearoa New Zealand that the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau communities have been meaningful contributors to our country—on the rugby field, on the battlefield, in business, in Parliament, and right across every corner of our country. It’s important that we acknowledge that contribution because this goes, in part, some way to making sure that we acknowledge that by also allowing them to fulfil the great words left to us by our forefathers which say te pai o te nohoanga a te tuakana me te teina ki raro i te whakaaro kotahi [it is truly wonderful when the older brother and the younger brother are of one mind].

I think that’s important, because as tuākana and tēina we know the value of that cultural premise. We know that when we provide opportunities, as is provided in this particular bill, for whānau of Cook Island descent, of Niuean descent, and of Tokelauan descent to return home, it speaks to many of those aspects that have already been mentioned: economic prosperity, social prosperity; and I want to also add to that, cultural prosperity.

It is not by coincidence—in fact, I’d say it’s good planning of the House—that just prior to this bill was a Treaty settlement bill. That’s important because it’s these kinds of bills that provide opportunity for whānau and tuākana to go home, to make sure that they have the means to be able to contribute meaningfully to their communities, to their country. That is really important. Why? Because we know the language loss is a terrible thing; cultural loss is a terrible thing. As is the tradition in the Polynesian cultures, the way that we are able to actually pass on our knowledge and our teachings and genealogy to our young people is through our elders.

This particular bill, of course, we know, allows for the residency to be more portable. It allows for those of Cook Island, Niuean, and Tokelauan descent to actually be able to return home, and I think that’s really important. It can’t be missed in this debate. I agree economic prosperity is a good thing and social prosperity is a good thing, but I know as a Māori and having witnessed people leave our rural communities to go to the urban centres who haven’t returned—I’d argue in this House that, actually, many of the symptoms that are plaguing our society—in particular, my people, Māori people, Ngāpuhi people in Auckland—today is simply because of disconnection to culture and disconnection to home. A bill like this allows for those people from the Islands—from Tokelau, Niue, and Cook Islands—to head home, and that’s really important to me.

It provides flexibility. We know that now—and the honourable member Alfred Ngaro mentioned it—the world is becoming more and more connected. We are able to travel more and more. It’s easy to pop home and to come back to Aotearoa New Zealand and actually to call both places home, and that’s a good thing. I think that’s an excellent thing. And it should never ever be one is sacrificed for the other. We know that, in fact, it’s cheaper to fly to the Cook Islands than it is to fly to Wellington at some points in time, but I will leave Air New Zealand to the side.

💬 Hon Tim Macindoe: I’m coming with you.

Ha, ha! Other members have raised that—but, look, I think that’s important, because of connectivity, and as the world gets smaller, it’s important that we have bills like this that will allow that flexibility, to allow members from communities of Cook Islands, Tokelau, and Niue, obviously, to be able to call both places home, to make sure that not just them as individuals but their families can do that too. That’s a multi-generational thing, and these are the added benefits that a bill like this actually provides.

Improvements to the pension portability—that’s a no-brainer. I say “improvements” because this particular bill and the purposes of this bill have come through iterations and come to a certain point today. It hasn’t always been as good as, I believe, this particular bill is. In fact, in the past, as the Hon Carmel Sepuloni has already mentioned in her contribution, under the last regime, it was this. [Gestures with hand] We acknowledge that the uptake of this particular provision wasn’t very high, so we wanted to be able to make sure that in this new and exciting Government, in acknowledging our Polynesian connections, we can actually make this provision more available to those people of Niue, Tokelau, and Cook Island descent. So that’s an important thing.

My colleague the Hon Carmel Sepuloni obviously spoke to much of the technical aspects of this particular bill: the number of years required before one is eligible, the ability for it to be portable to and fro—if you like—from the two homes of Aotearoa and the Pacific Islands. Those are all good things. I think that the economic prosperity that will come from actually having a more engaged community between Aotearoa and the Islands is a good thing. As mentioned by the previous speakers, the skill set that people attain while coming to New Zealand—and other places in the world, but in particular here in New Zealand—they’re able to take that back to their particular homes and make sure that their communities are prosperous is a good thing, and it’s a no-brainer. In fact, I’ve said previously, this relationship is an evolving one and I’d like to think that, in the future, the shared prosperity between those Pacific Islands mentioned in this particular bill and Aotearoa New Zealand can be a longer and more meaningful discussion, but we’ll leave that for another time.

At this particular point in time, we want to once again, on this side of the House, support this bill, say it’s a good bill—it’s a great bill, in fact; promoted by my colleague the Hon Carmel Sepuloni. It is, I believe, long overdue and will contribute to a wider and more robust conversation about the prosperity of the wider Pacific into the future.

So, finally, just once again, a big thankyou to all of the people that have had a contribution to this particular bill. We know that on a recent tour of the Pacific, people outside of this House have made their thoughts known on this particular bill, and so we want to thank one and all—of course, the Hon Carmel Sepuloni, for the promotion of this bill—and to say to this House that we’re proud to pass a bill like this. In true Māori and Polynesian tradition, I want to finish by saying tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā tātou katoa.

Thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker. It is with pleasure I rise to talk to this bill, a bill that I believe is long overdue. It was June last year when the then Prime Minister, the Hon Bill English, paid a visit to the Pacific, building on a lot of dialogue that has happened over many years, as other speakers have indicated, as to the usefulness of changing the settings and changing the rules. So National supports this bill very much.

I acknowledge the Hon Henry Puna and others in the gallery whom I’ve spoken to about this situation many times. In the last term of Government, when I was the Minister responsible for WW100 commemorations, I learnt the stories that Alfred Ngaro, my colleague, alluded to just before about the courage and the bravery of the Pacific Islanders who fought and gave their lives for the Commonwealth. I don’t think they were treated particularly fairly at those times, but nonetheless they showed great willingness to serve as part of New Zealand’s, and the wider Commonwealth’s, battles that were going on.

I think that when we tried to change the settings in 2015—and I was the Minister for Seniors at that time—it didn’t work as well as we had hoped it would. I think we expected it to cost about $5 million; it cost about $1 million, which showed the uptake was not particularly effective, but, really, what was required—and the message has been coming through loud and clear—was that we needed to make it as easy as possible and that the five years after 50 rule needed to go. There was a letter in April of 2017, last year. The Minister of Foreign Affairs stated that, based on advice he had received from his officials and the reports he had had during his own visits to the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau, the current settings were just not working as well as they had intended to be. So, clearly, more was done, and I commend the Government and the Minister for carrying through this legislation. It has been an important thing to do, and I acknowledge that.

I also acknowledge that we needed to do this, and we also needed to be fair. So, as others have indicated, there are special categories—one of them is special portability. So if an individual moves to one of the 22 nominated Pacific nations, they can have a proportion of their New Zealand superannuation with them, but there is a very special relationship with the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau because those people are New Zealand citizens, and this bill, I think, reflects a wider constitutional responsibility that New Zealand has for its citizens living in the Pacific. For them to be able to take their skills, take the wisdom that they have learnt in their time away from their homelands back to those communities to fuel that economic powerhouse but also, as the previous speaker, Peeni Henare, indicated, the cultural exchange—we are richer as nations from having shared your people and we are becoming more aware of the issues through the Pacific through having people living here from the three islands. We need to acknowledge that they need to return home at some point, and I think it needs to happen at a time when people are able to make a financial contribution through their New Zealand superannuation.

So, on many levels, I think that this is an excellent thing to support. I don’t intend to take too much more time on this, beyond acknowledging the people in this House who, over many years, have listened to the people of the Pacific, have heard what has been said, and have come up with a solution that this entire House supports so that it can be to the betterment of the three Pacific island nations. So, without hesitation and with pride, I commend this bill to the House.

This is a proud day for New Zealand First and for every single New Zealander out there who voted for New Zealand First in the 2017 election. I have to say, I accept the sincerity of the Hon Alfred Ngaro’s speech, but I’m going to go back a little bit in history, because I think, this being the first reading, it is appropriate that we do that. I will acknowledge, with thanks and gratitude, National’s new-found position, but I have to say to Alfred Ngaro: if you truly want to represent Pacific Island people by passing legislation such as this, you’re in the wrong party to do that. You should really be over on the side of the House, maybe with—

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Order! Could I just encourage you not to bring the Speaker into the debate. Thank you.

Yes, thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker. He is in the wrong party, and he could better represent them from over here. Why do I say that? I think we need to, at this point in time, go back and look at the history, and I say the political history, of this nation. On the question of superannuation, generally speaking, there is only one person, one party, that can claim the title of being the heavyweight champion of superannuitants in this region, and that is the Rt Hon Winston Peters and New Zealand First. On the question of super, there’s only one person, one party, that has consistently fought for the rights of, the dignity of, and the well-being of superannuitants of this nation, and the integrity of the superannuation policies and laws that this nation has either passed or failed to pass.

I want to say that if we go back—and we need to, because this is a very significant day. This is a very important day in the history of this nation when it comes to fairness, equity, dealing with prejudice, and dealing with injustice. If we look back over history and the way in which superannuitants have been dealt with, we recall very vividly the attacks on the Labour - New Zealand First Government when we introduced the SuperGold card. We look back on the cuts that were made to that and the direct impact on superannuitants during the time that National was in Government—those nine long years, when they attacked the rights and privileges accorded to superannuitants through the Labour - New Zealand First SuperGold card.

We look back at the surcharge, the “no ifs, no buts, no maybes” promises that it would be removed when they came to power, by National, and subsequently its non-removal and the fact that it took till 1996 in a coalition negotiation between New Zealand First and National to finally get rid of the surcharge.

We think back to the times when people dipped their hands into the Superannuation Fund to fund other projects and Government spending. It tended to be National. If we look back to the implementation of the Cullen fund, the vision that was displayed there and the courage, it was a Labour - New Zealand First Government. And then we come a little bit more into the more recent past, looking at who then cut the contributions and the impact that has had on sustainability, and who then talked about reducing payments—it all comes back to the National Party again.

If we then look at—

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Order! Could I just ask the member, please come back to the specifics of this. Thank you.

I think what is important about this bill is it sets in place a promise that was made—

💬 Hon Tim Macindoe: Superannuation rose significantly under the previous Government.

—a promise that was made, Mr Macindoe, on the back of a Supplementary Order Paper on this very matter in a speech given by the Rt Hon Winston Peters on 29 April 2015 when the then National Government sought to deal with this problem but cut short. Now, Mr Peters put down a Supplementary Order Paper that is actually reflective of what we’re doing here right now.

I’m going to requote some of the things he said, because these things have just been repeated in the House, ironically by the National Party members who now support the bill. He said at that time that this legislation that this coalition Government is now addressing and correcting was “extraordinarily biased and prejudicial towards the Realm countries in the Pacific”. He said then that the “Minister of Foreign Affairs, Murray McCully, has continually emphasised the special and historic relationship of the Realm countries, and the Social Assistance (Portability to Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau) Bill is [only] doing … half [of the] … job.” that it should. He appealed to the Minister “to finish what he started and amend the agreement to exempt the Realm countries from section 8(c)”, and that’s what Mr Peters’ Supplementary Order Paper was all about. But did they listen? No.

He talked about “A concession to those who retire to these three islands is a gesture of goodwill, and their special relationship to New Zealand”—something that he’s just repeated on the tour with the Prime Minister in those speeches around Pacific reset and in those discussions that he’s had in the Cook Islands. So here we are, backing up those words with our deeds, and Minister Sepuloni is introducing this bill for its first reading, which is actually a case made of a promise made and a promise kept. We’re very proud of that.

He talked then about a simple change in the rule which meant that they did not have to return if they are a Cook Islander, a Niuean, or a Tokelau Islander, or, for that matter, if the person were a New Zealander working in the Islands. He talked about removing the need for them to return to live in New Zealand for five years and how illogical it was to deny a similar concession to a special group of retirees in the Cook Islands—re-emphasising the very point that we are now dealing with.

He talked about the social and economic impact on those islands, something that the Hon Alfred Ngaro has now repeated as being the reason that the National Party will support this, and we applaud the Hon Alfred Ngaro for acknowledging that now, but we do have to say that he could have done it in 2015. Why is it that it has taken another three years and an election to get members on that side of the House to address an issue that was simply prejudicial, simply undermined the social and economic viability of these Island nations, simply stripped out skilled people, forcing them to return back to New Zealand, leaving their whānau, to meet their obligations so that they could get that portability.

We would simply plead that on the day, and it will happen, that there is another National-led Government, remember this moment. Remember this moment when they, the National Party, had to accept and admit that they were wrong. Front up. Don’t just give a nice speech here today. Say sorry. Say sorry, because Mr Peters was very clear—very clear—that at the same time that these impositions were being placed on Pacific Islanders—Niue, Tokelau, Cook Islands—that Government was letting 87,000 people retire into New Zealand and collect superannuation after living here only 10 years—87,000.

When you compare that to the 400 people that we’re talking about now, what can one say about that? One can only say that that seemed pretty prejudicial, pretty uncaring, and pretty unfair. This was never about an election lolly scramble aimed at garnering votes. This was about recognising the very things that every member has spoken about this far: the history, the connectivity, the fact that these nations are us and we are them, and about honesty, fairness, equity, and removing a policy that was simply prejudicial and actually undermined the economic viability. It stripped out skill sets that were viable for mentoring, tutoring, and helping those that are still in those islands live and grow. We just hope—I should say on behalf of New Zealand First—that National will in the remaining speeches find it within itself to be a little humble and to apologise.

Madam Assistant Speaker, may I start by saying what an honour and a delight it is to have Prime Minister Puna, the high commissioner, and other representatives of the Cook Islands Government with us today. It is a great privilege to have you here and we are thrilled that you are here to witness such a historic moment in our Parliament. At the risk of being admonished, I shall look in this direction and may I also say how appropriate it is that you, Madam Assistant Speaker, are presiding over this debate and also to have had as the first speaker from the Opposition the Hon Alfred Ngaro to lead off, as the very first person of Cook Islands descent to be an MP in this Parliament. We are very proud of that.

May I say to the Prime Minister and his delegation that we are very proud of both of these MPs who are very dedicated and effective members of our Parliament and who also, I believe, are inspiring to migrant communities in New Zealand from many different countries. I acknowledge the fact that ours is now a very diverse Parliament. We are much stronger for that. We are proud of that and, as I say, it is a great inspiration in my own community and right around the country. I acknowledge all of our MPs in this Parliament who were not born in New Zealand but who have made this their home and I thank you for the way in which you enrich our country.

The purpose and the implications of this bill have been well traversed by most of the previous speakers and, in particular, I acknowledge the Hon Carmel Sepuloni, who spelt it out in great detail, as did the Hon Alfred Ngaro and most others. Notwithstanding the very churlish and ill-informed contribution that we have just had to listen to, most of the speakers have acknowledged what a proud and historic day this is, and, in particular, have acknowledged that it was the Rt Hon Bill English who made the commitment while he was Prime Minister last year that has led to us coming to this point. I thank the new Government for continuing with the measure, and I would like to feel that the bipartisan spirit that had prevailed until the last speaker made his contribution might be resumed, because this is a day for us to be magnanimous, to be proud of what is happening, to acknowledge the fact that it is a measure whose time has come and it is, I believe, widely supported right around the country.

I certainly believe that it is widely supported in my own community in the fine city of Hamilton, New Zealand’s fourth-largest city, where we have a vibrant Cook Islands community and also smaller communities from Niue and Tokelau. I thoroughly enjoy and appreciate my association with all of those communities and again acknowledge how much they can contribute and how much they enrich our community. I appreciate their values. I appreciate their dedication, particularly their love of family, their valuing and appreciation of education, and the many skills that they bring into our workforce.

I also acknowledge however the great lure of home. In fact, having had the delight—probably the greatest family holiday that we’ve ever had in my family was about four years ago, spending a week in Rarotonga—

💬 Matt Doocey: Oh, where are the pictures?

The pictures are on the desk in my office, Mr Doocey, and I’d be delighted for you to come and see them. In fact, I have one photo in a frame on my desk just because it’s such a wonderful memory of a very happy family time in such a beautiful and welcoming country. I have to say that our man from Aitutaki here has yet to extend the invitation to me to take me off to his island, and I look forward to that. I’m determined to return one day and to enjoy his hospitality.

But because time is short, I’m going to leave it at that point but will just say again how proud I am that we are making this big step today—the first step in an important piece of legislation that will make a huge difference, a huge difference, in the lives of many, many people who are currently living in our country who also have New Zealand citizenship but the ability to return to their homes. This is a sensible, pragmatic, and, I believe, compassionate measure. I also am proud to support it. Kia manuia.

Kia orana, Madam Assistant Speaker. I am very proud to stand and support the Social Assistance (Residency Qualification) Legislation Bill on behalf of the Green Party. I want to congratulate Minister Sepuloni for bringing this bill to the House—a really important way that we can show better support, better connection, and better responsibility for our Pacific cousins, our tuākana, as tangata whenua will often refer to our Pacific Island relations and whanaunga.

I did want to start also, as many have done, because the tangata whenua connection with our Pacific Island whanaunga is a particular one and is a unique one, and so I too, from the tangata whenua perspective, would like to acknowledge the Cook Island Prime Minister, the Hon Henry Puna, the high commissioner, representatives, and staff from the Cook Island country in relation to the proud migration and waka journey travels and stories and settlements that Pacific people and tangata whenua to Aotearoa share collectively in terms of our whole collective migration and visiting and exchanging and learning throughout the different Pacific countries as we came down through the Pacific, and also culminating in our settlement here as tangata whenua in Aotearoa.

We have a unique historical whanaungatanga, a unique historical relationship to our tuākana, to our Pacific cousins. It is not just historical. We, of course, also share the similar colonial and imperial impacts on our homelands and what that has done for our people, our language, our land, our culture, and our relationships to each other, as well. I want to acknowledge, for example, the commonalities in the language revival work that both tangata whenua are consistently working on and reviving, and also the language revival work that is happening here in Aotearoa for our Pacific communities. Of course, I acknowledge that the Cook Island, Niue, and Tokelau countries are our citizen brothers and sisters, our citizen siblings, and it’s really wonderful to have our Cook Island, Niue, and Tokelau MPs in this House with us, as well. We’re all very proud of that in this House.

So this bill is going to make it easier for people from the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau to be eligible for our New Zealand superannuation and/or our veterans pensions—our pension payments. As Minister Sepuloni has already stated, the Governments of the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau were concerned—and I picked this up keenly—about the way that the current eligibility criteria for New Zealand pensions was preventing or deterring people from returning home and contributing to their countries at an earlier age. At this point, I just want to pick up on some of the media reports—which I am grateful for—which shared some of the stories where, for example, many people trying to meet the current standards moved to New Zealand from those three nations to meet those criteria for the New Zealand superannuation payments by spending at least 10 consecutive years in New Zealand after the age of 20, and then they would move back to the Cook Islands, for example, where perhaps anxiety had set in in their fifties and they realised that they wanted to return to their ancestral lands. But they then had to move back to New Zealand again to be able to meet those stringent requirements of the five years after 50 rule—spending at least five years here after the age of 50.

So having to move back and forth, or having to stay put and not go home at all, to be able to meet that five years after 50 rule—we’re getting rid of that. Or, actually, we’re not getting rid of it; we are making sure that the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau are included in the net for the residency eligibility, and this makes me happy.

This makes me happy because, as tangata whenua—and my tungāne and colleague, the Hon Peeni Henare picked up on it today as well, where he talked about the similar sorts of stories we share of the exodus of tangata whenua from our tupuna lands, our ancestor lands, to the cities and what that has meant today. Something I’ve taken for granted is so many of our young people—well, not just young people. Many of our people—more and more of our people—don’t even know what marae they are from, what iwi they’re from, or what hapū they’re from. By the way, that doesn’t mean anything to us. Even if you don’t know your marae, you still belong to it, and we’ll still claim you, even if you don’t know you’re from it. So it’s not just the economic and social disconnection; it’s a spiritual and cultural disconnection that, hopefully, this bill is going to go some way to try to assist in that reconnection work. So I am pretty stoked to be able to stand up and support the bill from that common experience of what it means.

Yes, we’re very lucky to be able to call several places our home. Even here in Aotearoa—I live, by the way, in Manurewa, in Manukau. Manukau City is, I think, the largest Pacific city in the Pacific. I live there and that is my home, and has been for two decades, but my ancestor homes are also in the Far North and on the East Coast. They are all equally my home, but it is also important to me that I am able to feel connected to my ancestral homes, as well. So I’m glad that I’m able to stand here and support this bill, because, often, we’re torn between those many homes and torn between choosing where we want to be and where we are able to be.

So, just to go into a little bit of the detail of this bill, for the Green Party representation, currently, to be eligible for New Zealand pension payments, one has to have been present in New Zealand for 10 years since the age of 20, and then the five years, which must be from the age of 50—that’s that five years after 50 rule that I was referring to previously—and—

💬 Matt Doocey: Life begins at 50.

Sorry, sorry, Mr Doocey? Five years after 50? I think that’s a simple way for me to be able to understand what’s going on here.

The reason why this is for Niue, the Cook Islands, and Tokelau is because New Zealand has constitutional responsibility for our citizen siblings and cousins in those countries, and we’re wanting to reflect that relationship. So I did want to pick up—oh, I’ve sort of talked about it a little bit more, but the specific concern that drove those countries’ Governments to advocate and lead the call for this amendment was also around the problems of depopulation. You know, we’re still facing that here, so we know a bit about that and the social, economic, and cultural consequences, and the instability, also, of not being able to settle for as long as you would like in one place and having to go back and forth, or not being able to return when you would like to because of these stringent rules.

I’ve got a little bit of time, and I did just want to acknowledge that in 2015, some attempt was made to improve the portability of pension payments for people of Cook Island, Niue, and Tokelau descent, but, basically, that didn’t quite work, and it didn’t have the take-up that we would have hoped for. I do acknowledge Mr Ron Mark took us through the politics of that—I acknowledge that—and so here we are today, allowing for that change, which was, apparently, the change that New Zealand First proudly pushed for. Here we are today, allowing for that five years after 50 rule, to include the residents of the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau to contribute to the residency and eligibility.

So I just wanted to finish by again acknowledging the calls and the leadership from the Governments of the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau, who saw fit to work with us and who will continue to work with us, and who saw fit to call for this. I think we should keep reviewing and keep checking—and I know our Minister will—to see what sorts of improvements or what sorts of teething problems there are. I know that we will keep checking on that so that it’s set up to do what it’s supposed to do. I am just very proud here, as tangata whenua and an MP, to support this bill. Meitaki.

What a great bill, and what a great bill to end this week. It’s been a tough week for the Government. It’s great to see we can come together and finish on a high note. I do want to take the time to apologise to that last speaker, Marama Davidson, because I did interject and it was the wrong thing to do. It wasn’t rude or flippant. I said, “Life begins after 50.”, and my point was, now those people whose lives are beginning after 50 will have a choice of what country they can stay in, and I welcome that.

I just want to acknowledge the members that have gone before me who have talked about the history of this bill, the symbolism. I don’t want to traverse that, but I do want to raise four points—it is a debate—and the first is: I did hear some chatter that people think we’re taking away that five years after 50 residency rule, which we’re not. All we’re changing is what country you do that in, either the Realm country or New Zealand. Because I think it is important—that five years after 50 rule.

Also, I think this bill actually is an acknowledgment for advocacy, because if I look at the amendments the past National Government made in 2015, allowing people from the Realm countries to apply—but it didn’t go that extra step, allowing people in the Realm countries to stay there after 50. There’s a risk now because I’m going to mention names—I won’t remember them all. But if I think back to members like Poto Williams and Carmel Sepuloni, who were very fierce in those debates, and I think this bill demonstrates how they’ve continued with that advocacy, and that’s how this bill has ended up here today.

I would like to give a heads-up to the select committee that is going to receive this bill. I’ve already had a lady in my Kaiapoi office who came in. She went to Australia at age 49, never thought about the implications, and now she’s back at 65 and obviously hasn’t triggered that five years after 50. So it is going to be one of those things where scope will be challenged in the select committee process, and good luck to the select committee for that.

My final point, I think, is that this bill is a direction of travel, and I think some in this House have already alluded to that. New Zealand is becoming a very diverse place and I think that should be applauded and celebrated. It’s fantastic. And, equally, nation States; people are choosing to live in multiple places over the course of their life, and it is something that we are going to have to think, in the Westphalian nation system of our nation States—retain their sovereignty but allow that flexibility, as people live in different countries along their life course. So I’d like to commend this very good bill to the House.

I understand this is a split call—Paul Eagle, five minutes.

Kia orana, fakalofa lahi atu, and malo ni. Thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker, for this opportunity to talk on this bill. Can I acknowledge, as others have already, our dignitaries in the House this afternoon. I also want to acknowledge all of those who have put work into making this bill what it is today. There are many who have given a contribution—not only our Pacific brothers and sisters on both sides of the House but many of us who have the Pacific feeling and willingness to ensure that our Pacific nations, particularly those who are New Zealand citizens, are acknowledged as such and given the same rights and fortune that those living on the New Zealand mainland have.

There was some debate around who’s done what and where and how, but, look, I think the former Prime Minister went part way to bring a solution here. This Government has gone the full way, and, through the Minister, the Hon Carmel Sepuloni, will deliver the result that the people of the Pacific have been long waiting for.

I want to just focus on a few themes. I want to say that this is long overdue and that’s been said before too. Also, acknowledging the special portability and pay extra special attention to, and mention of those New Zealand citizens in the Pacific—the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau.

Can I thank the Governments, first and foremost, of those countries, who have been long at pain to bring their concerns to realisation. They will be happy with how this will proceed. I’m lucky because I have an electorate where the underpinnings of the Rongotai electorate are very much Pacific, and one only needs to look in Newtown there. It became the mini Pacific of Wellington, the capital city. My father was a Methodist minister in Newtown and many of his colleagues were proud to talk about the history, particularly—if I start with the Cook Islands, the Reverend Tariu Teaia, who was the first Cook Islands minister ordained in, I think, the early 1950s, into the Pacific Islanders Presbyterian Church there in Newtown. And that also had a Niuean congregation by the time it hit the 1970s, with the late Lagi Sipeli, and later they moved from there to St James and to St Giles now in Kilbirnie.

My point is that those churches, as symbols of the Pacific, remain; the communities have moved on. The mamas and the papas are still there. Some of the whānau are still there. Unfortunately, house prices are a little high these days, but, generally, they continue to work locally and their spirit, their heart, very much remains in the electorate.

I was fortunate enough, I had to answer to Mum and Dad occasionally, and they’d tell me “You better get to church.”, so I am privileged to talk to the congregation still. And it is very much the talk of the church aisles, and I hope that when it gets to the select committee process, they bring the colour of the Pacific to that select committee and let them know forthright what and why they think this is a wonderful idea.

They spoke of the anxiety. They spoke of tension and stress, children versus parents, and parents versus the mamas and the papas. But what it will do, and it’s why I’m commending this bill to the House, is it will finally deliver that cultural respect, that dignity, and also allow whānau to focus on that social and economic impact, whatever country they’re in, and at whatever age, aligning to the notions in the bill and bring happy whānau, once and for all.

Thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker, and greetings also to our guests. It’s a pleasure to take a short call on this bill. The first reading of a bill is the opportunity to review the frameworks of the bill, that will then carry it through to select committee and onwards—as I gently break down the mechanics of the bill, certainly to help me better understand it. The application of the bill is clearly applicable to peoples of the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau. The instrument is pensions and veterans benefits. The legislation currently as placed is twofold: firstly, the New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Act 2001, and, secondly, the Veterans’ Support Act 2014. I’ll come back to the portability amendment Act shortly.

In 2015, the amendment Act that I was talking about allows people from these islands to apply for their benefits from the Islands, rather than physically—a proviso to the other provisions being that they’re 65 years or older and that they meet the other residency requirements that have been thoroughly described in this House today, as the 10 years in New Zealand since age 20 and the five years since age 50. The change that this bill brings into account is the five years in residence since age 50 can now be as a resident of the Cooks, Niue, or Tokelau.

I wanted to conclude this short call—I was looking back over the third reading of the 2015 Social Assistance (Portability to Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau) Bill. The Minister responsible at the time was Anne Tolley. I thought some of her concluding comments at that time carry through the aspirations today that we had then with that bill. I’d like to read some of them. This is in the voice of Anne Tolley: “As I mentioned earlier, this bill is also about ensuring the economic and social viability of the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau. Depopulation and its related social and economic consequences is a longstanding issue for those islands. The current ‘resident and present in New Zealand’ requirement has been described as a disincentive for Cook Islanders, Niueans, and Tokelauans who are established in New Zealand to return home before the age of 65 … People returning at age 65 would have the capacity to contribute to the workforce 10 years in advance of the age of qualification for New Zealand superannuation. As pension payments are paid in gross, it is expected that more income and value-added tax will be paid by returning migrants to contribute to the local economy.”

The final sentences were: “I want to reiterate that this Government wants to make sure that those countries and territories that have close constitutional ties with New Zealand are recognised and that their ongoing economic and social viability is supported.” I think those aspirations from the sponsor of the 2015 bill carry through to this bill. It’s with pleasure that this side of the House supports it all the way through to select committee and onwards.

Thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker. Kia orana tatou katoatoa, malo e lelei, faakalofa lahi atu, and thank you for this opportunity to speak on the Social Assistance (Residency Qualification) Legislation Bill. But may I, first of all, acknowledge the presence of the Prime Minister of the Cook Islands, the right honourable Henry Puna, and all of your officials here in this House. Today is indeed a historic day. Not only do we have the Prime Minister here, but it is not often that we have a House and a Parliament here in Aotearoa where we’re actually in agreement, and I’m glad that we’re actually in agreement on this particular bill.

I’d also like to acknowledge you, Madam Assistant Speaker, because I know this is a bill that is very dear to your heart. I’d like to acknowledge the Hon Carmel Sepuloni as well, and the Hon Alfred Ngaro, who spoke before me, because I know this is also a bill that you and your party are in agreement with today.

This bill is about fairness. It is about fairness for New Zealand citizens, especially our citizens from the Realm countries of the Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau.

We know that for many people, especially when they’re middle-aged, similar to myself, there comes a time when—and I know this from a lot of our constituents in South Auckland. More than 50 percent of the people that live in my constituency in South Auckland are from the Pacific, and thousands are from the Cook Islands. I’m told by many of them that around about their late 50s and early 60s, many of them would prefer to go home—go back home to their country of origin. Some of them were born and raised in the Cook Islands or in Niue or in Tokelau, but many of them were born and raised here in Aotearoa New Zealand. But when they turn 50 or reach their early 60s, many of them, after having worked in Aotearoa New Zealand and paying taxes for many, many years, want to go back home, contribute their skills, and actually give assistance to their community back in the Islands. That is one of the reasons why I’m so glad that we have this particular legislation here today.

But, before I go on, I also must acknowledge and commend the Deputy Prime Minister, the Rt Hon Winston Peters, and the New Zealand First Party, because they have championed fairness for superannuitants—including the proposed changes in this legislation—for many, many years. I also must say that our coalition Government, led by Labour, with New Zealand First and the Greens, is very committed. We are committed to a reset of our relationship with the Pacific. We know that the right honourable Prime Minister has just been to the Pacific with a lot of our MPs here, and it is because we’re looking at resetting our relations with our Pacific neighbours.

I’d also like to acknowledge the economic and social achievements of our Pacific nations. We know that there are so many things that not only our Pacific people in Aotearoa contribute to while they’re here but our Pacific people, when they’re at home, also contribute. When we look at trade, we know that the trade between Aotearoa and the Pacific is one of those instances where we actually trade positively. From that alone, we know that we are really grateful to our Pacific brothers and sisters.

One of the main reasons why we are in support of this bill is because it will allow our residents, our citizens—and can I just go back to the fact that the citizens of the Realm countries are citizens of Aotearoa New Zealand. So the reason why we are in support of this legislation is because it is the fair thing to do, to treat our citizens here and to treat our citizens that are in the Realm countries in a fair way. It will allow folks in the Realm countries to take the pension and to be portable with their pensions. Right now, New Zealand superannuation allows people to go to 22 Pacific countries, and my colleague the Hon Carmel Sepuloni has already covered this quite well. But what this legislation allows is it allows people to live here in Aotearoa and to go to the Cooks or to go to Niue or to go to Tokelau for that five years after they turn 50, and that can only be a good thing. That is the fair thing that we should continue to allow.

New Zealand residents, of course, and New Zealand citizens can also enjoy those potential benefits, because they too, when they turn 50, can also live here or, if they choose, they can go and live in the Cook Islands or in Niue or in Tokelau. I know that there are some people that would also be willing to do that as well. I commend this bill to the House. Meitaki maata.

Thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker. It’s my great honour to stand and support the Social Assistance (Residency Qualification) Legislation Bill in its first reading.

First of all, I would like to acknowledge the dignitaries present in the gallery, and it shows the importance of this bill that we have got this high level of dignitaries to support this bill in this House. I would like to acknowledge you, Madam Assistant Speaker, for your representation of the Pacific people. I would also like to acknowledge Carmel Sepuloni for bringing this bill. This bill is a continuation of what the Rt Hon Bill English initiated during his visit to the Pacific last year, and I congratulate the Minister for continuing to address this issue, which is very important. I would also like to acknowledge the Hon Jenny Salesa, who spoke before me, and your contribution. As you mentioned, South Auckland has got the biggest Pacific population—largest Pacific population—in the whole of the Pacific.

We are one family of Pacific nations and we have to look after each other, and this bill exactly does that. We want to give the option for people where they choose to live, whether they want to live in New Zealand or they want to go back to their home country and spend the rest of their time with their families over there at large.

This is a great bill, and I don’t have any hesitation in supporting this. Looking at the time, I want this first reading to conclude so that it can be referred to the select committee and reported back as soon as possible and become law, where people can take the benefits. With these words, I conclude my speech over here.

Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. Kia orana. Faakalofa lahi atu. Malo ni. Kia ora koutou katoa. I just want to begin my call on the Social Assistance (Residency Qualification) Legislation Bill by acknowledging our very esteemed guests who are in the gallery today: the Prime Minister of the Cook Islands, the high commissioner, and the representatives of the Cook Islands Government. I also want to thank Ministers on both sides of the House who have been involved in the progress of this bill from its inception right through to its first reading today.

I want to go a little bit into, of course, the purpose of this bill—what it does—but also some of the constitutional responsibilities that New Zealand has with our Realm nations. I will go into this, potentially, in a little bit more depth than some of the previous speakers have done, simply because I’ve actually been asked by a few people what the “Realm nations” means—sometimes by newer migrants to New Zealand as well, but there seems to be a little bit of confusion, so I thought I’d take this opportunity to delve into that a little bit more. Also, in terms of why this bill is so important, I also want to touch upon the importance of this bill a little bit as someone who migrated to New Zealand, even if it might not have been from the Pacific nations.

Also, I speak as the Labour member based in the Maungakiekie electorate, which, of course, is possibly the next electorate after South Auckland that has the largest population of Pacific people; we have close to 14,000.

💬 Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Hmm, I don’t know.

Maybe? The member for Kelston and the Minister’s looking at me, so potentially not. But anyway, my point is that we have a large population of Pacific peoples—close to 14,000—and I know that close to 4,000 are from the Realm nations, so this is a bill that is significant to them as well.

A little bit about what this bill does: it’s basically about greater pension flexibility for people who want to retire in any one of these nations—the Cook Islands, Niue, or Tokelau. I thought, also, I’d go into a little bit about the eligibility for super. Of course, you’ve got to be a New Zealand citizen or a permanent resident, 65 years or older, and there’s a residence qualification criterion as well, which basically means that people need to have resided in New Zealand for 10 years after the age of 20, and for five years after the age of 50. It’s that latter part of the residency requirement that this bill that we’re debating in the House today will change, as it were.

The way it changes this requirement, of course, is that previously you would have—not you, Madam Assistant Speaker, but the person applying—had to have lived in New Zealand for those five years after they turn 50. But once this bill passes—and I’m glad to see that it’s supported unanimously—people who are applying can stay in any one of those Realm nations as well and have that residency period count towards the residency requirement for this bill.

So, as I was saying, it allows a lot more flexibility when it comes to the pension. This bill also recognises the special relationship that New Zealand has with Pacific nations. As, in fact, our Prime Minister, the Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern, said recently at ASB Polyfest, this is undeniable because we are part of the Pacific—there is no them and us when it comes to New Zealand. That holds even more true when it comes to the Realm nations, of course.

At this point, I’ll just go a little bit into what that actually means. Now, with the Cook Islands and with Niue, a little bit of history—and I actually found this quite interesting as well. The Cook Islands was a dependent territory—and, of course, you’ll know this very well, Madam Assistant Speaker—of New Zealand between 1901 and 1965, after which they became a self-governing nation in free association with New Zealand. There was a similar situation for Niue as well, although self-governance kicked in for Niue in 1974.

Now, the self-governing status and free association with New Zealand means, of course, that people who are born in these Realm nations—and that includes Tokelau, as well—are considered New Zealand citizens. But with those from the Cooks and Niue, their Governments are, of course, responsible for the law making and for conducting their own affairs, which is slightly different from Tokelau, which has been administered by New Zealand since 1926. So that’s what it means when we refer to the Realm nations, and that’s why the constitutional responsibilities that New Zealand has, of course, are a little bit different again.

Now, the member Peeni Henare touched upon the importance within Pacific cultures of passing on the unique heritage and unique languages, identities, and culture that define us. And, actually, that’s something that I can relate to as well, coming from, originally, India and then Singapore. It’s something that a lot of the Asian populations here in New Zealand hold on to also. We have multiple homes, and there’s really nothing wrong with that.

What this bill addresses is the upheaval that a lot of families experience when, you know, they might have come here, potentially from one of the Realm nations, contributed to New Zealand, gone back to, say, the Cooks or to Niue to be with their family, to contribute to those countries as well, had businesses there, and then they’re expected, under the status quo legislation, to uproot themselves—it’s an upheaval for their families—and to come back to New Zealand to fulfil that five-year residency qualification criteria. And that’s not just about the person who’s applying—it’s never just about the person who’s applying—it’s about their families as well and the repercussions that that upheaval has on their families. This bill, when it’s passed, will remove that and it will allow for a much greater sense of stability in that respect, as well.

We often talk about how ethnically diverse New Zealand, and indeed Auckland, has become. We talk about the fact that we have over 220 ethnicities, now, represented, and we collectively speak over 160 languages. We often also say, and I strongly believe it, that our strength as a nation lies in that very diversity. So, if we’re going to say that, then the onus is on us to actually walk the talk and make it such that this diversity can flourish in New Zealand.

I often use a little analogy, where, if one looks at different threads, for example, they’re unique, they have a certain amount of strength and beauty in and of themselves, but woven together that strength and that endurance is enhanced, and it weaves into a beautiful piece of fabric that’s collectively so much stronger. That’s how I see the strength that lies in our nation when we talk about the strength of our diversity as well.

So this bill, basically, at the crux of it, is about making the system fairer. It’s about making it fairer for people from our Realm nations. It’s about ensuring that they’re not uprooted and that their families—

💬 Hon Member: I raise a point of order.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): We were dealing with the matter. [Matt King in Chamber without a tie]

I’ve kind of lost my train of thought. Yes—it’s about making the system fairer for everyone. It’s about making the system fairer for people from our Realm nations, who will face a lot less upheaval and sense of being uprooted, but it’s also about making things fairer for New Zealanders, because uprooting and expecting people to face upheaval is never in the best interests for us either. So it is with absolute pleasure that I stand today and commend this bill to the House. Thank you.

Bill read a first time.

Bill referred to the Social Services and Community Committee.

Waiata