KiwiSaver (Oranga Tamariki Guardians) Amendment Bill

Despite the rather complex title to this bill, it’s a rather simple fix which will affect 6,000 foster kids living in New Zealand. What the bill tries to do, what the intent of the bill is, is to, basically, allow all foster parents and all foster kids the same rights as any other child in New Zealand to be able to put them on the right track, and ensure they have a strong financial future and security, by putting money away to the place where only they can put it that can’t be touched other than by the accountholder him or herself, and that’s KiwiSaver.

The problem is that at the moment only legal guardians, which is about 700 out of 6,000, can do this under law, and it’s virtually impossible. Take the case of Megan Barclay. Megan, you’re watching. Thank you for your assistance with this. You’ve done a huge service to all foster parents and foster children in New Zealand, so I acknowledge you. Basically, at the moment, Megan’s spent several years trying to open a KiwiSaver account for her foster children.

Throughout this process we’ve heard from submitters. One grandfather told me he tried to open an account for his granddaughter. There were several kids in the family. One of those granddaughters was a foster child, and he just couldn’t do it, hence why we’re talking about this here today. I also want to acknowledge Sam from Simplicity. Sam, you’ve done a great job helping me push this bill and why it’s needed. And if we can change this law, it ensures that all foster kids in New Zealand are on the same playing field as other children.

We also heard from a submitter: a foster child, a young teenage boy. He spent 12 months pounding the pavements, trying to find a part-time job to earn some money so that 10 or 15 years later he could save his money up to buy his first home. After 12 months of pounding the pavement he eventually found someone that let him mow his lawns at the weekend for some pocket money. This young child saved up $2,500, which is a remarkable effort. He wanted to put this money away. The only place he could put it would be KiwiSaver. But despite saving up $2,500, the money was stolen by his foster parent. Had he had the option of a KiwiSaver account, this money would be safe. I heard from another young gentleman. He saved up $700 over 10 years, only for that to be lost because he moved homes so often. He was moving homes every four or five months and eventually he lost the money. So if these kids had the opportunity to open up a KiwiSaver account, it would ensure that these kids—the most vulnerable children in New Zealand—are put on the right track.

I want to acknowledge all parties who agree on this so far. We want to give foster children the same rights as other children, but what we don’t agree on is around what sort of level. The original intent of the bill was to allow all foster parents that ability, but unfortunately throughout the process there’s been two main objections from the officials—Oranga Tamariki officials, the IRD, and, unfortunately, Government MPs. I just want to talk about those two main objections, because at the moment it’s quite a high threshold to become a legal guardian. So once you’re a legal guardian, currently you can open a KiwiSaver account, which is almost impossible because you have to go through the CEO of Oranga Tamariki. That person—she’s got tens of thousands of tasks. She’s extremely busy. To get to her you’ve got to go through your social worker, and the social worker, of course, has hundreds of tasks.

So I just want to talk about Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 258, which talks about allowing all foster parents, not just legal guardians. The first main objection was that signing up a foster child to a KiwiSaver is an important decision and shouldn’t be taken lightly, and therefore should not be open to any foster parent unless they have long-term care of their child. I just want to address that point.

The bill came about because there is a barrier for all foster parents to open a KiwiSaver account, and that barrier is the law. As I mentioned, in the law at the moment the foster parent has to go through the social worker, if they’re a legal guardian, to get to the legal guardian, which is the CEO of Oranga Tamariki, who is an extremely busy person. My SOP creates a legal obligation where Oranga Tamariki have to provide a birth certificate and an IRD certificate to the foster parents so they can make this work. Unfortunately, the problem takes many years to occur. Supporting this SOP will give KiwiSaver rights to all foster parents and ensures that all kids are put on a level playing field.

The second point I’d like to address is that an objection came along from the Government MPs and officials that any decision to sign up a foster child to a KiwiSaver account may in some way disempower the rights of the birth parent. I’m yet to hear from any member of this House, or any official, one negative aspect—one negative aspect—of signing up a kid to a KiwiSaver account. Let’s be very clear. Any birth parent whose legal guardian status has been transferred to Oranga Tamariki has lost more than the right to decide the financial future of that child. Their child has been deemed so vulnerable that they have lost in most cases the everyday right to feed that child, to house that child, to care for the financial needs of that child, to show love for this child. Often these children have never had love in their lives. Often they’re born without knowing their parents. Often they don’t even know their own name. In the scheme of things, a decision to sign a child up to KiwiSaver pales in comparison, compared with the other daily realities of caring for a child.

For foster children who are in State care, they have no financial security. And anyone in here who talks about ensuring the birth parent has the right, I ask you to go out and talk to a foster child who has had their money stolen by their foster parent. See how they feel about this. Let’s give these foster children a pathway to financial success. Let’s put them on the right track.

KiwiSaver is a success, and I just want to quote from the Rt Hon Winston Peters on The AM Show yesterday, who’s in support of this bill. He said, “The law currently is an ass.”, and for once I agree with the Rt Hon Winston Peters. He gave his word yesterday on The AM Show that New Zealand First are going to support this bill and the SOP, and I thank him for that.

I’d just like to finish with a poem. Please bear with me. It’ll take just over a minute. This is from a foster child who wrote to me. Often these children are voiceless, so I’m giving this child a voice here in Parliament in the highest court of New Zealand.

So you’ve asked what it takes - to get an ID.

To prove I exist - that I am the “Real Me”

I can’t get a job - because IRD

Need to give me a number - to prove I’m the “Real Me”!

So I’m told by social workers - “well you don’t have a birth certificate”

Which in your adult world - kind of makes me “illegitimate”

There is a copy on file - but they say it’s not “the real McCoy”

So the lawyers say we have to go - and pay for one more!

So the powers that be - fill in an application

To get a new birth certificate - so I’m part of this nation!

In the meantime they tell me - “not to worry, it will be cool”

But after 5 months - they must think I’m a fool!

I’m not a fool, just powerless - relying on adults

I still can’t have a bank account - never mind a bank balance!

I can’t get youth rates - to get the bus and train to course

I have to pay as an adult - as there’s no other recourse!

So 5 months later - I am still waiting

No updates or news - it’s so very frustrating

You expect me to be patient - do you not think I have been

Try living my world - not sure you’d be too keen!

So this is my plea - for all of us teenagers in care

Can you sort this shit earlier - I wonder if you dare?

The lack of these basics - is contributing to my stress

Is it any wonder - I am a teenage mess?

I hold on to hope - that somebody will listen

But frankly - it all seems too much of a mission!

Just get me an ID - so I can join the adult world

And don’t blame me - for what is quite absurd!

You just don’t make it easy - everything’s so tough

The process is humiliating - it’s really shit and rough

But I don’t exist - as I cannot prove who I am

Maybe this has come from no one - do you know who I am?

I’ll leave it with that. I look forward to the debate, and I encourage every member of this House—we are elected here by the people to ensure we make the right decisions for the people. Let’s give those voiceless foster children in New Zealand a voice. I commend the bill to the House.

I stand to support Hamish Walker; I’d like to give him significant praise for the effort that he’s gone to and the passion that he has applied to this particular member’s bill.

It raised many questions for us as a select committee when we were debating this. We have now received Hamish’s Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) in his name, and it seeks to actually take us back to the beginning, which is where we started with the KiwiSaver (Foster Parents Opting in for Children in their Care) Amendment Bill. It takes out the words that were suggested in the original bill that went through the select committee, where it was changed to Oranga Tamariki and Oranga Tamariki Guardians. The reason for that is that when Oranga Tamariki are legal guardians of these children, there becomes an opportunity for the legal guardian, which is either someone who has a court approved plan or the CEO of Oranga Tamariki, to apply on behalf of those children for a KiwiSaver account. But what it does is it actually eliminates the other 5,500 children who are in foster care, as for many of those children becoming a legal guardian is something that could take many years. So the opting in for children and young people who are simply looked after by kin carers or foster parents—they deserve the opportunity to have a KiwiSaver account. As we did hear from Hamish Walker in his contribution, unfortunately, the process that they have to go through in order to apply for a KiwiSaver account has been insurmountable. The challenges have, therefore, meant that children under the care of Oranga Tamariki are failing to get the same financial security as their peers who are not in Oranga Tamariki’s care. So I would urge the House to support Hamish Walker’s SOP, to give these children the opportunity that their peers have.

We did hear during the submission process about the inequality that is felt by some of the children in care when they could not open a KiwiSaver account on their own. We have heard about the challenges with getting ID and with getting an IRD number. These are all very time consuming processes and not something that someone who is a caregiver or foster parent can easily achieve. They need the support of the chief executive from Oranga Tamariki, who is usually distracted with other, probably more pressing issues than opening KiwiSaver accounts. But one of the things that I do recall from the submission process was the impassioned plea by a couple of young people who submitted, who were care-experienced. They’re very, very confident, articulate young people and I was so impressed with their submission that they simply wanted to be treated the same as children who come from secure family homes. This is the plea that we put to this House—that we recognise that these children need to have financial security. A KiwiSaver account is the only financial instrument that can only be accessed by the person who owns it. As Hamish explained about his young man that saved his money and had it taken from him, KiwiSaver is the only secure financial instrument that protects their investment in the future.

I believe that these young people deserve to have the right to open their KiwiSaver account and have their foster parents or kin carers assist them with that. I endorse what Hamish said about finding a rational reason why this can’t be so; it’s simply a bureaucratic hurdle that this House can overcome. I do implore the people opposite to support this SOP. Thank you, Mr Chair.

Thank you very much, Mr Chair. Very pleased to take a call, the first of several I suspect, because while it’s a small bill, per say, it’s actually touching on something substantial. But pleased to talk, first and foremost, conceptually, because I think it’s actually a good bill, but also in support of my colleague Hamish Walker. He’s one of the real hard workers of this Parliament and working, I think, on the right response to need. We can often get some frivolous bills coming through this Parliament—member or Government—and, actually, this is really, really important.

So I suppose I want to direct, initially, my comments around the intentions and trying to, hopefully, with the assistance of the member in the chair—or have I just misled the committee in some way, I don’t know.

CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): The member in the chair shouldn’t leave the chair. We’ll put it down to a first term.

As a courtesy I’ll wait for him to return, if that’s OK. I think that actually illustrates the hardworking member as he continues to serve the good of this House.

I suppose the question I have for the member in the chair is really trying to get my head around where his initial intention started, and to where the bill, as it now sits, has landed. So, fundamentally, we had a bill which was to provide empowerment to foster carers. But through a series of acrobatic flips we now end up with the amended bill basically returning, as I understand things—and I suppose I’d like to be corrected early on if I have this wrong—the powers of this bill back to things that already were. In other words, in some ways is the current bill—before we get on to the matter of the Supplementary Order Paper (SOP)—really affecting no change? So my understanding—and the member in the chair will, I’m sure, happily correct me, or his adviser—is that we have a situation currently where foster parents cannot open, on behalf of their foster child, a KiwiSaver account. They’ve always had to go to the legal guardian of what once would’ve been called Child, Youth, and Family Services, now Oranga Tamariki. That, in fact, this bill as currently amended and as we’re discussing in the committee of the whole House, has really just bought it straight back to the guardianship and is precluding and continuing to preclude foster parents. So, in fact, the initial intention of the bill, at this point, has been defeated. Therefore, we must and have to, I think, as a House—if we’re going to respect the member and his intention—bring forward SOP 258 in the name of Hamish Walker, which does make it very, very clear that a foster parent can actually undertake this.

I know there have been objections of short-term care by a foster parent. I would probably make the argument that that sometimes is, sort of, the nature of fostering actually. Then, because of the very nature of fostering, to still stop and not allow a young person to have access—that’s a little odd. I suppose the first fundamental question to the member is: has the intention of his bill as amended through the select committee and as we discuss it here in Chamber been circumvented? The second is around just the nomenclature, just the change of names. It’s a small technical question. I can see that the suggestion is now to call it, “Oranga Tamariki Guardians”. I suppose my simple question to the member is: if we are to agree to this, and granted it will come through in clause 1 discussion, and if we need to amend it in the future, is it going to require a legislative instrument? And why I say that is we’ve obviously got history in this House where we’ve moved from Child, Youth and Family to Oranga Tamariki. We obviously know there are some issues around Oranga Tamariki at the moment. I’m not presuming in this committee that there is going to be immediate change, but I just want to understand whether there will be any changes there.

The other question that I have at this stage is: has he consulted in any way around the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act issues? Again, we are dealing with young people, and I suppose if there is a question around who can open the account, is there a fundamental right of the child to have an account? So at the moment, if I’ve read the bill correctly—and through the select committee there’s been a lot of discussion around who can open the account, and why or why not. But, actually, if we are to reverse the process—and again I put it to the member to consider it as the right of the child—then the nature of rights implies duties and obligations. In other words, if the child of a certain age has the right to a KiwiSaver account, then it must follow logically and legally that we as the Parliament have a right and obligation to bring this about. So I will just leave that there at this time.

There are just a couple of things that I’d like to say and make very clear from New Zealand First’s perspective. First of all, I’d like to congratulate Mr Walker on bringing this to the House. I sat through the select committee’s consideration when he brought it through, and it was clear to all of us there that he was very, very passionate about it and he wanted to make some changes, and we could see where he was going in his intent.

New Zealand First is supporting the bill as it has been reported back from select committee. But we are not supporting the Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) in Mr Walker’s name. I know that Mr Walker has said something contrary to that earlier on, but the reason why—and he quoted the Rt Hon Winston Peters. The reason why the Rt Hon Winston Peters said that was because we are supporting this bill and the changes that it brings. It does give access and delivers for foster kids, just not those that parents still have guardianship rights under the law. So there is a very distinct difference, and that’s the reason why we are supporting the changes in the legislation being brought back from the select committee but we won’t be continuing to support the SOP that Mr Walker has brought through. He has also brought up a couple of points, and I think that someone from the National Party did too, on the reasons why people are not supporting it.

Throughout the select committee deliberations it was made quite obvious to me—and I’m pretty certain every single member that was sitting on that select committee at that time—that the officials found some very worrying aspects of it, very complicated aspects of it, and aspects where it was just not feasible or workable in terms of where Mr Walker wanted it to go. I think that we traversed all of the issues quite thoroughly as a select committee, and, like I stated earlier, we all understood and accepted and appreciated the intent with which Mr Walker brought the legislation to the House. That, I think, shows that if there was a way that was workable and feasible, that didn’t have any of the complications that Mr Walker’s SOP would bring, then we would have supported that. But the fact is that the expert advice that was given to the member’s bill—and this is what Mr Walker needs to understand—is independent. It is assessing the legislation, the changes to the law, and the outcomes that it may or may not bring. The advice that we got, the advice for the select committee, was that the direction that Mr Walker wanted to go in could not be completed to his full fulfilment.

Lastly, I would also like to quote the Minister for Children, Tracey Martin, who gave a first reading speech on this. She made it quite clear that—and I quote: “it is very unlikely that New Zealand First will support any Supplementary Order Papers that [Mr Walker] brings forward in an attempt to bring this bill back to a wider or broader application that disempowers the parents who are still the guardians of these children.” And that is important in order to understand the reasoning why New Zealand First won’t support the SOP that he brings forward. Minister Martin also stated that we will support this bill in the way it’s written and the way the select committee has brought it back to the House. Thank you.

It’s extremely disappointing that the Rt Hon Winston Peters, on the AM Show yesterday, said to Duncan Garner, “I’m going to support this bill because the current law is an ass.” What do you know? New Zealand First now gets up, back-flops, and they are supporting the bill—and I acknowledge that and thank you for that—but unfortunately the intent has been completely gutted out of this bill. Progress is progress but now it’s only going to benefit around 700 out of 6,000 children.

I just want to quote the Rt Hon Winston Peters from yesterday: “These foster children and their KiwiSaver accounts”—sorry, this is Duncan Garner asking Winston Peters. Winston Peters’ reply was: “Sometimes they say the law is an ass. Certainly looking at your programme this morning, thinking what on earth is wrong with that?” “Do you pledge as Acting PM to sort it out today?” “Yes, I do. Look you can’t agree with success, and what we’re trying to do here is we’re trying to change the culture of young people to start off by being frugal and being savers. What on earth is wrong with us?” “Do you give us your word on this today?” What do you think the Rt Hon Winston Peters said after being asked, “Do you give your word on this today?” It was, “Yes.”

Now, this isn’t the first time that New Zealand First has—

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Welcome to the real world.

—flip-flopped on a few things. That is right, Mark Mitchell. I’ve been here two years but I’m learning very fast not to trust New Zealand First. I just want to address the members around the question of the birth parents still having rights. What he’s basically saying is that even though all the other rights of that parent have been taken away by whatever means, we still want to give them the right of ensuring they can stop our foster children from having a KiwiSaver account. I encourage the member to go out and talk to a foster child who has lost money or had money stolen by a foster parent. This is about ensuring that foster children have the same rights and are on the same playing field as any other child in New Zealand. We are elected to this Parliament to be decision-makers. Why are we letting Oranga Tamariki be the decision-makers? The Hon Tracey Martin, the Minister for Children—it would be great if she was here but obviously she’s too busy. She needs to take a proactive stance—

💬 Darroch Ball: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Mr Walker just referred to the member not being present in the Chamber, and that is against the Standing Orders.

CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Yes. That’s absolutely correct. The member is new, but he knows.

Thank you, Mr Chair. Let’s be very clear. A foster parent has lost every other single right, yet we’re worried about them losing the right to ensure we sign their kid up to KiwiSaver—and not one member has told me one negative aspect of doing so. What is so wrong with this SOP, which allows any foster child to have the same rights and obligations as any other child? Just think—what are we saying to those foster children? They don’t have control over many aspects of their life. They don’t have control over where they live. They often get moved around a lot. Yet this House, despite being elected for the people, can’t even get this decision right.

Thank you, Mr Chair. I am happy to make a contribution in support of this bill, the KiwiSaver (Oranga Tamariki Guardians) Amendment Bill. And I’d also, like my colleagues before me, like to commend the member Hamish Walker for bringing to the attention of this House the plight of a very vulnerable group of young people in New Zealand, our foster children.

I’m pleased to be able to say that I sit on the Social Services and Community Committee and it’s been an eye-opener for me in terms of understanding that this challenge was there. I didn’t know that this challenge was there for these children in our country—a vulnerable group of children. I’d also like to acknowledge my committee members as we discussed this bill in our committee. There was a genuine desire to really find a solution to the challenges that I think Hamish has really illustrated very well in his opening statement. So there was collaboration and a genuine desire to work through this.

Prior to this bill being presented, I had no idea about the challenges that these parents faced in trying to do something good for these children. And it is something good. I don’t think anyone has ever said that it was a bad idea to open a KiwiSaver account for a child. And I think, and Mr Walker has stated as well—I don’t think there have been, actually, any concerns raised either through a public submission or through a member in this House as to why it is a bad idea to give this option to these children. What is the risk? What are the unintended consequences in allowing this pathway and giving this option to these foster parents?

So as we’ve presented in the report from the committee, members on this side of the House did present a minority view, which is, essentially, that this bill doesn’t go far enough in terms of the intent that was presented by Mr Walker, which is that, yes, we are going to reach some children and those children will be lucky. I think you’ve indicated 700. That still leaves another 5,000-plus who will not have the opportunity. So I guess, at the end of the day, the law is the impediment to providing that access, that process for these children, for those foster parents who want to give that opportunity to the foster children. So I’m fully in support of the member Hamish Walker’s Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 258, because it will address the inequity that exists for these foster kids—and this bill was actually about inequity of access. So this is what Hamish Walker’s SOP is about. So I am fully in support of that. Again, I would like to hear from any other members of the committee around what the unintended consequences would be in terms of alleviating and providing this channel, that process, for those families.

As a mother of five children, I have to say KiwiSaver is not something that is front of mind when I’m thinking of my children: in the day-to-day care of my children, food, clothing, a roof over their head, love, and support. But this is something that these foster parents are giving these children and yet we cannot give them the opportunity to support these kids, to give them financial security into the future by giving this access to them. So I really commend the member on highlighting this issue in this House and I support this bill and the SOP.

Mr Chair, I appreciate you accepting my call. To be honest with you, Mr Chair, I’m on House duty; I wasn’t intending to speak to this bill. But I’ve been listening to the debate. And, firstly, I want to acknowledge Hamish Walker because he’s a straight talker, he speaks from the heart, and he brought a great bill to this House that’s going to address—we’ve heard some impassioned pleas in this House today, earlier in the day in the general debate, about Oranga Tamariki and the kids that we see going into Oranga Tamariki care, and, you know, we should be focused on the kids.

The fact of the matter is we’ve got 7,000 children every year in our country, in New Zealand, that are stripped away of the right of actually having a KiwiSaver account. That’s wrong. There’s no downside to having a KiwiSaver account opened for a child to start providing the ability for them to have savings, and for them to be able to support themselves later in life, or even to have the ability to be able to access those KiwiSaver funds to get themselves into their first house. This is a good bill.

Hamish Walker—I know Hamish. He’s a man of integrity.

💬 Hon Member: I hope you do.

💬 Hon Member: He’s a colleague.

Well, it’s not funny, Labour Party I don’t know. I haven’t heard anyone take a call. I haven’t seen—they’re all over there laughing. Someone stand up and take a call. This is a serious matter. This is actually about 7,000 kids that don’t get access to a KiwiSaver account. So stand up and take a call. Tell us why you’re not supporting the bill.

Hamish Walker is a guy that actually, when he shakes your hand, when he looks you in the eye, you can trust him. You can count on his word and you can see by his reaction in the Chamber today that actually, New Zealand First—sadly, he’s realised that New Zealand First are not people of their word. They don’t stand by their word. You had your Deputy Prime Minister, the leader of New Zealand First, on national media today. [Interruption] Look at their reaction. You can tell by their reaction how sensitive they are to it. It’s a disgrace that they go on national media and they say, “We’re supporting the bill.”

💬 Darroch Ball: We are.

You’re not. You’re supporting the first part of the bill that affects 600 children—right? So the sponsor of the bill identified the fact that he needed to make a change to strengthen the bill to make sure that all 7,000 kids were able to open a KiwiSaver account. Currently, the way the bill is, the part of the bill that you’re going to support will mean that 600 children can get a KiwiSaver account. That’s better—without a doubt that is better—but let’s all agree in this House: wouldn’t it be better for 7,000 people to have access to that KiwiSaver care.

Now I see the Minister for Children is in the Chamber. I’d like to see the Minister in charge of Oranga Tamariki stand and take a call and explain to us why—explain to this committee and explain to the 6,300 kids out there that won’t have a KiwiSaver account what the reason for that is. I can probably guess what the reason is: because the advisers have told her that there are issues around legal guardianship and it’s all about the parents.

Well, you know what? Do what Hamish Walker’s doing in not making it about the adults. He’s actually making it about the kids. He’s saying the adults have got it wrong, they can’t agree, they’re arguing, the kids have had to be removed from house—hugely unsettling for them. It’s difficult for them. He read a poem that was sent to him. If you listen to the poem, it’s from a young person—a young Kiwi that can’t even understand why they can’t get an account or some form of ID that means as a country we recognise they even exist. You all laugh. You all joke about it. It’s not funny. It’s not a joke. It’s a serious bill.

The Minister’s in the Chamber. Stand up and take a call and tell us why New Zealand First—yep, is supporting the guts of the bill; we acknowledge that, we thank you for that. Why aren’t you supporting his Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 258, because he, as the sponsor of the bill, has clearly told you there’s a gap in the original bill? It’s been identified. Six hundred kids will get an account—600 kids or 700 kids will get an account; there are 6,300 that won’t. We want to see them have a KiwiSaver account. There is no downside to that. So I invite New Zealand First or the Minister to stand and take a call and explain to all of us and the country why you’re not going to support his SOP. Thank you very much, Mr Chair.

Kia ora. Thank you, Mr Chair. I’ve just returned to the Parliament from being off-precinct at a meeting and, because I’m very interested in this topic, I watched the livestream through my parliamentary app. I thought I’d just come down and clarify that, considering that a statement was made by the member in the chair. I also thought—

CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! No, I’ve dealt with that issue and the member—

I apologise. I won’t raise it again.

CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I’m on my feet.

I beg your pardon.

CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): And members should not comment on the Chair’s ruling.

Kia ora. Thank you, Mr Chair. So having been watching the debate, there’s obviously been some questions that have been put to the member and the member has made some statements. It has been up and to this point a very respectful committee with regard to Oranga Tamariki and the children that are in their care. It is unfortunate that the member, through this process, has now decided to breach what has been the respect of this House and decided to make politics with these children.

The other statement that has been made—and the Hon Mark Mitchell had asked for me to stand and explain why New Zealand First will remain, as clearly articulated in my second reading speech, supportive of the bill that came out of the select committee, by majority, a process whereby this Parliament listens to experts and officials and takes the advice of those who know, because I’m sure the members in this House don’t arrogantly believe that they know everything about the law around guardianship. Apparently Mr Mitchell knows everything about the law with regard to these children. Mr Walker and Mr Mitchell apparently know everything about the parents that are involved in this situation. It is unfortunate that Mr Walker and Mr Summers have shown their ignorance around the actual reality of the legal guardianship rights, both in media and in this House, which means that the New Zealand public should be incredibly dubious of a Supplementary Order Paper that they put in at the last minute so that no other advice could be taken, in an attempt to completely null and void the select committee process—a process that is highly respected around the world. Our select committee process, through the advice of experts and Government departments, creates good law.

The select committee was advised that this would not be good law in the way that the bill was originally written, and the Government departments went out of their way to create the best possible solution for Mr Walker and the intent he had. That is what we pay them to do. That is what they have done, not just for this Government but for the previous Government and every Government before it. New Zealand First will not second guess the select committee. New Zealand First will not arrogantly think that they can override the advice of experts and the cross-parliamentary support that we get through a majority report back from a select committee. We will not do it, merely because Mr Walker and a friend think they know better, because that is the only argument that has been put forward. It is the most manipulative process I have seen in this Parliament since I came into it—the public way that Mr Walker and a friend attempted to manipulate a political party through media pressure in an attempt to change what had been clearly articulated at the second reading. And he stands and continues to manipulate the answers provided by the Right Hon Winston Peters, which were articulated correctly.

New Zealand First is supporting this bill. New Zealand First will support this bill and the way that the cross-parliamentary select committee reported it back to the House.

I think the Minister for Children needs to go and actually talk to her leader about why he supported it yesterday on The AM Show, saying that he will give all foster children the rights to access KiwiSaver. The second point—

💬 Hon Tracey Martin: I raise a point of order, Mr Chair. With regard to misleading the committee, is it a situation that I would have to take a complaint like that to the Speaker immediately or is it something that we need to deal with in the committee now?

CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): There’s been some heated things said in this debate, haven’t there? I think the member has been here long enough to know the process of dealing with the issue that she raised. I’m happy with the content of the debate so far. I think it’s been robust. I think that there is a debating point, which both the member herself and the member in the chair have been debating. So long as people stay within the rules of the committee, I’m happy for things to proceed.

I think it’s incredibly sad that the Minister is now playing politics before children. If she had a listen throughout the end of the select committee process, during the second reading, it was very clear that nearly every single National member that spoke said they were going to lodge this Supplementary Order Paper (SOP). It was lodged late last week. There was no playing through the media. The Rt Hon Winston Peters was asked about this yesterday and I’m just reading out his statement.

Secondly, she said it’s too hard. She said it’s too hard, yet she’s the Minister for Children. Then why has it happened, the Hon Tracey Martin? You’re supposed to be the Minister for Children, sticking up for all foster children, not just the lucky few—700 out of 6,000. If she truly cared, she would make this happen and allow all foster children—give them all the ability—to ensure they are on the same playing field, something they can actually control in their life, and allow all foster children to have access to KiwiSaver.

Name for me one negative aspect—one negative aspect—of signing up a child to KiwiSaver. We haven’t heard one negative. These foster parents have lost their rights to look after their children through whatever means, yet we’re so concerned about giving a birth parent a right—they’re worried about losing their rights to enabling a child to have KiwiSaver. I think that’s completely wrong.

If we want to talk about what this truly means, I encourage the Minister to actually go out there and talk to some foster children. Talk to the ones that have saved up four years. They’ve saved up several hundred dollars, or the case of the young chap who wanted to save up for a decade or two to buy a house. He saved up $2,500, only for it to be stolen by the foster parents. As the Hon Mark Mitchell said, this is not about us; this is not about the MPs. But, clearly, the Government side prefers to play politics over children. Let’s put the foster children first and vote through this SOP.

For reasons unrelated to this particular bill, I’m possibly the last person expected to take a call on it, but I’ve been moved to do so by the debate I’ve just seen. I want to rise on behalf of the ACT Party in support of the bill and in support of the Supplementary Order Paper 258, in the name of the member in charge of the bill, Hamish Walker.

People sitting at home watching this debate might be trying to work out what it’s all about. I want to say it’s very simple, particularly the matter at issue over this amendment. It’s very simple. You see, humans are born more vulnerable than any other species. You know, we can’t walk for the first year, and that’s why we’re so reliant on our parents—more than any other species. That is why foster children, without their natural parents, are so vulnerable. That’s why it’s so important for the rest of our society to actually put in place support so that those children have the opportunity to make the most of their lives.

We’ve heard from Hamish Walker stories of kids who have gone from pillar to post—from one home to another, from one foster parent to another—and yet they have a determination to put something away, to give up spending today, so they can save and have a better tomorrow. That’s got to be one of the most admirable human qualities that I’ve heard of in this committee for a very long time. Yet, without the ability to open a KiwiSaver account, the risk is that as they go from pillar to post, they are vulnerable to losing their savings, to losing their property rights. This particular Supplementary Order Paper 258, what it would do for those children is make sure that they don’t have to have their particular Oranga Tamariki guardian signed up so they can have a KiwiSaver account.

This amendment that the Government parties—New Zealand First, the Greens, and Labour—are opposing would mean that that child would need only one of the foster parents opting in for children in their care to sign off that they can have a KiwiSaver account. That account might be very useful for them to protect their savings and their property rights if they find themselves, perhaps, in another home in a few months’ time. They shouldn’t need a particular Oranga Tamariki guardian to sign off so that they can have that safe haven for their nest egg. They should be able to get anyone. I would say they shouldn’t need anybody; they should be able to sign up for a KiwiSaver account as a right as an individual.

I think it’s a little bit unfair that New Zealand First have been picked on for not supporting it, because, actually, I think all of the House—all three of the Government parties—should be supporting it. Yes, indeed, New Zealand First should be supporting it because they fundamentally believe in private property rights and the idea that ordinary people can do extraordinary things and make a difference in their own lives, and that should extend to letting any kid in any foster situation open a KiwiSaver account. Then you’ve got the Labour Party, founded amongst the mining towns of the West Coast over 100 years ago, founded on the idea that working people who work hard and save and invest can have a better tomorrow—and Michael Wood knows because he’s got a wry smile, and he knows he agrees with me. He knows the Labour Party should be supporting this amendment. Then the next question is: what are the values of the Green Party? That, unfortunately, is beyond me right now, but I think they should vote for it on the basis that they say that every decision should be made at the lowest possible level, and in this case it should be that foster kid that just wants to save some money.

So it’s worthwhile putting in place an amendment that says foster children, any foster child, with any of their foster parents—anyone acting in loco parentis can sign them up to have a KiwiSaver account. That’s what this committee should do. That’s what the Government parties should do. I know that’s what the ACT Party will be doing. I commend Hamish Walker for bringing this bill, and with that thought, I will not prolong this debate any further. Thank you, Mr Chair.

The intent of this bill is one principle called the equity of opportunity. That’s the whole point of this bill. When it first came through to the House, when Hamish Walker brought the bill to the House and also to the first reading and then select committee, which I was a part of, he talked about the family that came to see him. He talked about that while there was meant to be an opportunity for the young people that were in their care—and we’re talking about vulnerable children; children who’ve been through traumatic and difficult situations. So therefore that’s the intent and that’s the reason for this bill. It’s called the equity of opportunity.

Now, I know the Minister for Children, the Hon Tracey Martin, knows about this, because both her and I—and we’ve been in this Parliament for exactly the same time—have fought for the equity of opportunity for foster carers and kin carers, because there wasn’t that point; that principle was not there. So we fought, and I want to acknowledge her because she was a champion behind this, and this year she launched—and I was privileged to be there—that opportunity that was now afforded to them. This bill is the same intent. It’s about having the equity of opportunity.

The Minister talked about the select committee process. Well, I have to say, there’s nothing disingenuous about the intent of this Supplementary Order Paper (SOP), because, right from the start, the intent of the original bill was exactly what the SOP is requiring. You see, the thing is that when we think about the equity of opportunity, there are currently 6,700 children in care. Under the current rules and regulations, where they are at the moment, and the advice that has been given, there will now be around about 700 children that will have access to that opportunity—by the way, where they previously would not have had that opportunity if it were not for the advocacy of Hamish Walker and also, too, that being championed by their family. So now we’ve been given 700, so here’s—

💬 Darroch Ball: What did the advisers say?

We’re hearing the chatter about the advice. So the advice that was given was this: currently, there are 700 that are able to access, and we can actually allow for that, right? Then it also said that the access can be available to other parents through another process. But can I say this: the intent of this is to make it an obligation, because, you see, while we turned around and said previously that equity of opportunity should have been there, if it wasn’t for this advocacy we wouldn’t have had that. So if it wasn’t for Hamish Walker putting this bill in—we thought that it was automatically there, but it wasn’t. What it revealed is that there was an impediment—in other words, there was a barrier—in the system. The system said that was there for the care of all children, for those who are actually currently in State care—that opportunity was there—when we realised through this bill that it wasn’t. You see, that’s the point. It’s now opened the door to 700. So there’s nothing disingenuous about what the attempt of the member is, because what he’s trying to do now is bring it back again into here.

I want to make the point that the Hon Tracey Martin talked about the words that were spoken by the Deputy Prime Minister. This is a very robust place. There’s what they call parliamentary privilege inside the House, but there’s also accountability for any of the words that we speak outside of the House. So in the public space, if a member of Parliament, whether it be a backbencher through to the Prime Minister—all of the words that they speak, and we’ve all been in that situation, are held to account. If in the public space the Deputy Prime Minister has said this—and I’d have to say, the honourable Deputy Prime Minister, when he spoke those words, he spoke them why? Because he knew the intent was right. He knew that in what Hamish Walker was putting through, there would be again the equity of opportunity for all foster children. That was the intent: for all foster children.

You see, that’s the point of this SOP. The point of this SOP is that it was 700 at the moment, under the current conditions. The intent of the member, of Hamish Walker, is to open up the intent so that 6,700 children will have access to that right and that opportunity. We have to realise this. You see, at this point it’s not just about KiwiSaver. While that’s the intent of this; it’s the principle that we’re fighting for. It’s the principle that all of these children have the right to access an opportunity for them. Today it’s KiwiSaver. It could be other areas that we think are important. The Hon Tracey Martin knows this, because she championed for the equity of opportunity, because at that point in time it was just for foster carers. What she championed was for foster and kin carers, so that broadened that out.

So that is the intent of the member here. I want to applaud him for his attempt and what he’s trying to do. We on this side support this SOP 258—why? Because it is about the equity of opportunity for all children in foster care.

Thank you very much, Mr Chair. Look, there’s obviously been a lot of argument, discussion, and, I don’t know, barbs flying across the House, so I’m going to put a suggestion forward. I haven’t tabled it as an amendment yet, and it’s probably more of a concept to put to the member in the chair, Hamish Walker, to understand. There’s obviously a disconnect between the original intention of the bill, which has been very clearly articulated by the member, that this is to empower foster parents to support their children, and we’re talking around 6,000 young people. Through a select committee process, we’ve ended up with a situation where, in effect, the dynamics have not changed. It’s been, as I mentioned earlier, some changes of name, but, in effect, it’s up to the guardian, which more often than not is Oranga Tamariki, and I understand—and the member will correct me if I’m wrong—it’s, effectively, the chief executive; she or he may be able to delegate that power. But a suggestion, perhaps, for us moving forward is: how do we, in effect, still allow a foster parent to apply on behalf of or at the request of the child that they are fostering? Could they, in a sense, get a checkbox, a permission, a letter that they have to reference Oranga Tamariki—in other words, the foster parents are still able to act in the best interest of the child and, I would stress, probably at the request of the child. I’ve heard the member in the chair speak this afternoon. He’s been very, very clear that this cause is not coming from foster parents per se, nor is it coming from politicians; it’s coming from the young people themselves. So is there an opportunity—

💬 Hon Tracey Martin: That might be misleading.

We’re just going to keep that very clear on record, but I—

💬 Hon Member: Just ignore it.

No, I’ve chosen not to ignore it, because I’m very happy for this to remain on the Hansard. So we have a situation where there’s been an argument that the rights of the guardian are not being respected if we actually allow the foster parents to act in the best interest of the child that they’re fostering, which, I might put, by nature is the whole point: they’re there to foster, to enact—I won’t go into my normal Latinate discussions, but they’re there to foster, nurture, and look after the child. Is it possible—is it possible—that this House can find a way forward to say, actually—

💬 Hon Alfred Ngaro: Come on—give us a bit of Latin.

I’m not going to give you any Latin, Alfred Ngaro—not tonight. Well, actually, you might get it later tonight. What we have is a situation where the foster parents can apply. Maybe they send an email, a letter, an indication to the guardian—that being Oranga Tamariki—who with just a quick form of process is able to actually say “This is perfectly fine.” To that extent, we end up solving three problems: firstly, the desire of the young person to have a KiwiSaver; secondly, that we have a foster parent whose rights in regards to their foster child have been respected; and, thirdly, we have the guardian rights, those primarily of Oranga Tamariki, respected.

I know there’s been a lot of talk about the full set of rights, those of the biological parents. I sort of understand that—

💬 Hon Tracey Martin: Watch out.

—to a degree, but I think—you know, I won’t so much watch out, Ms Martin, but I think it is a delicate, delicate area. But if, of course, we’re to put children at the centre of all things, it’s the child’s right which comes first, and the fact that the rights of the child have to be expressed outside of that of their biological family begins to raise questions about why they had to be separated from them, and there are a whole lot of consequences logically and legally that flow on from that.

I’d be interested, too, whether the member in the chair wishes to or not—of course, we have a whole lot of cultural relationships as well and how they are being rightly exercised. In fact, I think there are discussions at the moment, both in this House and without, about the rights of cultural needs over the children and how, if you will, that’s to be respected. So the suggestion is relatively simple: is there some way that the foster parents can be brought back into this bill, as has been suggested in the Supplementary Order Paper, but a means—an openness, if you will—for the House to actually see Oranga Tamariki able to tick the box in their guardian duty but allow the foster parents to do their best by their foster child?

I thank the member for his questions. It’s reasonably straightforward. Currently, the barrier in the way is the law. This creates a direct pathway for all foster parents to get there, if the Supplementary Order Paper is accepted. Currently, the only way or avenue is through a social worker, who needs the CEO’s sign-off from Oranga Tamariki. That’s the problem. That lady is so busy; she obviously has limited time. But that’s what this bill endeavours to do: give that avenue for foster parents to have a direct avenue. It also, most importantly, doesn’t discriminate and it gives equality to all foster parents across New Zealand.

I move, That the question be now put.

Motion agreed to.

The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 258 in the name of Hamish Walker be agreed to.