KiwiSaver (Oranga Tamariki Guardians) Amendment Bill

I move, That the KiwiSaver (Oranga Tamariki Guardians) Amendment Bill be now read a third time.

Let’s foster a financial future for the 6,500 foster children living in New Zealand. This bill is simple. It removes the difficulty of enrolling foster kids into KiwiSaver; it improves equality, puts foster children on the same playing field as any other child in New Zealand; and provides opportunity for our most vulnerable children—our foster children in New Zealand—to get ahead by allowing foster parents to open a KiwiSaver account for their foster children.

The three main issues as I currently see it—the first one is difficulty. It’s incredibly difficult to enrol a foster child into KiwiSaver. The current process: you have to go through your social worker, who then has to go through the CEO to sign off the paperwork. We know the CEO has thousands of tasks at hand, so this takes a while. You only need to look at Megan Barclay, who has been trying three years for this—she’s tried on three separate occasions. If you read her submission, she wanted to do this to provide some financial independence later in life. She wanted to save up funds so if that child left her, she could provide something for its future. She even approached Fostering Kids New Zealand, who on one occasion said what they had to do was meet the social worker at the bank and get the documentation, because a foster kid had started a job and needed to enrol into KiwiSaver to get the money, to get the contributions, from the employer.

You only need to look and talk to the grandfather—seven grandkids, one of those being a foster child—who wanted to leave some inheritance money for those children. He could do for six out of the seven, but for that foster child, couldn’t. It’s pretty sad. You only need to look at the numbers—around 320,000 out of 1.1 million kids under the age of 18, about a third, currently have KiwiSaver, yet only 3 percent of foster children have KiwiSaver. We want to remove the difficulty there is in accessing KiwiSaver for our most vulnerable—give them a chance to get ahead.

The second issue is equality. Currently, it’s not fair that foster children don’t have the same access to KiwiSaver as any other child in New Zealand. Foster children often don’t have access to birth certificates, to IRD numbers. Some of them don’t even know their own names at birth. Some of them don’t know who their parents were. We want to remove the barriers and the hurdles for these children. There’s already enough barriers and hurdles in place for them. Let’s remove the barriers and give them the best possible chance of getting ahead. A KiwiSaver account is not just a privilege for a few in New Zealand. This clearly demonstrates that foster children currently aren’t on the same playing field as any other child in New Zealand, as shown by the numbers of foster children—3 percent versus 33 percent of non - foster children living in New Zealand.

This is about opportunity. Enabling foster parents the opportunity to open up a KiwiSaver account ensures that foster children have the best possible opportunity, can get on the right path in life to lead a successful, financially secure, fulfilling life. Of the foster children who have lost that opportunity so far, one that comes to mind is the child that saved $2,500 over several years, only to have that money pickled by his foster parent. Now, we know that a KiwiSaver account is the only place the account holder himself or herself can touch. A bank account can be touched. For example, a second child saved up $700, only to have the $700 lost because that child moved home so often.

I’m trying to change the law here to give foster children the same opportunity as any other child to get ahead—something positive they can look forward to. Something they can build to, but that also gives them a sense of identity. This isn’t that hard. Unfortunately, during the process of this member’s bill—it’s been a fascinating process. I just want to thank all the foster children that did submit during the submission process. It’s hard enough to engage under-18s into politics, into democracy in New Zealand, so it was great to get so many submissions from those foster children.

I just want to pay respect to a 13-year-old called Blaze. She said she lived with her foster mum and dad. Having a KiwiSaver account would make her feel like other children in her life, because when she gets older, she can buy things that she wants, like a house. Isn’t it great that a 13-year-old is already planning for a first home? It’s pretty tough and almost impossible at the moment.

Another submitter, Angela, who’s a foster parent, she’s been trying to get a KiwiSaver account for a 9-year-old boy in her care. Despite trying for months and years on end, she didn’t have any luck. The saddest thing she said was the child in her care was left disappointed and frustrated. She lost track of how many hours and days she spent trying.

Through the submission process the National Party advised the Government that we would lodge a Supplementary Order Paper (SOP), which we did. The SOP was an amendment to allow all foster parents to have this right, because, currently, how it came back from the officials, which, unfortunately, the Government have taken on board, is that they’re only going to allow the legal guardians access to KiwiSaver. So now we’re only going to allow a privileged few foster parents—around 10 percent; 700 or 800 out of the 6,500—to have access to KiwiSaver. I think this is sad. I don’t often do this. I just want to acknowledge Greg O’Connor MP who spoke in the general debate. As he said, KiwiSaver is one of the most progressive things we’ve done as a country. We’ve all benefited from this. Well, Mr O’Connor, actions speak louder than words, and I hope that the Government thinks strongly about this.

It’s unfortunate that the Government is not allowing the full intent of the bill, because it’s all about control. It’s all about ideology. They think the best way for a society to succeed is controlling and running everything. I think this is absolutely sad that the Government is shutting down this idea because it is not theirs. They even changed the name of the bill from the KiwiSaver (Foster Parents Opting in for Children in their Care) Amendment Bill to the KiwiSaver (Oranga Tamariki Guardians) Amendment Bill. We are elected here to represent the people of New Zealand. The officials aren’t elected here to represent the people. We are here to make the best possible decisions to give all New Zealanders, especially our most vulnerable, our foster children, the same opportunity, same equality as other children, and remove the difficulties, which I’m trying to do with this bill.

I’d like to acknowledge everyone that’s helped me during this process: John Anderson; Sam Stubbs from Simplicity, who’s offered free fees; Katrina Shanks from Financial Advice New Zealand, who have offered free advice for any foster child, should they take it; all those brave foster kids who fronted up at Parliament and presented to the select committee—it’s a pretty scary thing to do, and I think it’s just fantastic that they did that—and all the caregivers, all the foster parents out there, I’ve met a large number of them over the last 12 to 18 months. You’re all incredible people, and I just want to acknowledge everything you’ve done.

With that, let’s give all kids the same opportunity, equality, and remove the difficulties currently in place for foster children and their parents trying to get ahead in life and lead fulfilling lives. Thank you.

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. I stand to support this bill—the KiwiSaver (Oranga Tamariki Guardians) Amendment Bill. I want to, on this day, acknowledge King Tūheitia, who celebrates his 13th year sitting on the ahurewa we call it, or the mantle that his mother once occupied. I want to acknowledge him, not just because of this commemoration, but because in his speech today he talked about equity and he talked about our tamariki. And I think that’s relevant in this particular case, because we do want equity. We do want our tamariki to have the best chance that they can to have successful lives. This is all but one part.

I do want to just say to that member in my support for his bill that there’s lots more we can do to make sure that equity is found amongst our families and for our young people, for our most vulnerable, like having incentives to join the KiwiSaver programme, like financial literacy skills that are taught through navigators who work within Oranga Tamariki, and like literacy plans that are pushed out into low-decile schools, of which my colleague Jan Tinetti has mentioned today. Those are all parts that bring equity to the discussion around finances for our young people and our most vulnerable. This Government’s proud of our record on that particular matter. In that vein, I too want to support this bill in the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise to take a call in this third reading of the KiwiSaver (Oranga Tamariki Guardians) Amendment Bill. It’s a disappointment that we only had roughly a short period of a speech for this bill, when this Government has constantly talked about the importance of tamariki, of children, and yet, in this House, where this bill—small in its intent but important in the ideal of wanting to have equity of opportunity. As the Minister spoke and he talked about the equity of opportunity; that’s exactly the point of this bill. I would have thought that there would have been at least a little bit more opportunity to talk about the bill, what it involved, what it entailed, and to do due respect to those people who submitted on this bill.

This bill is the KiwiSaver (Oranga Tamariki Guardians) Amendment Bill. The intent of this bill was to open up the equity of opportunity for children who often go into a foster care or a kin-caring situation, where they are traumatised, where many times they’re put back from what other normal kids would have in their situation. They’re in a new environment; new carers. They’re already having to struggle with the fact of a relationship that’s been broken with their parents and with their previous guardians. They’re really traumatised around the things that they may have seen—whether it be violence and other instances. The whole intent of this bill is to try and normalise as much as possible that situation.

I want to commend my colleague Hamish Walker for bringing this bill, because it came as a bill from a constituent that had a need. We are in this House because there are times in which we have constituents’ organisations who come to us with an issue that needs to be remedied. In other words, there’s a wrong that needs to be put right, and in this case we know the wrong that needed to be put right was the equity of opportunity for foster children—6,500 of them—to at least be able to be enrolled in KiwiSaver. The reality is that there are probably a lot of other kids in our communities around our country that aren’t enrolled, but for this case, this specific case, this is to allow them that opportunity.

While we’ve gone through the select committee process, I want to acknowledge those 90 submissions that were put through. They were put through with the intent of wanting to provide that chance under this current bill—and we will obviously support this bill. Why—because it at least allows the opportunity for another 500 children in foster care who would not have had that opportunity. But here is where there is a missed opportunity. This bill with the Supplementary Order Papers that were put forward in the name of my colleague Hamish Walker were to extend the ability for foster carers and kin carers to enrol.

The reports, the advice, that we got was that we shouldn’t do that and that it could set an unhealthy precedent. What I’d like to know is what unhealthy precedent there is from enrolling a child into a KiwiSaver account, where that guardian would not have access to pilfer or fraudulently take that money out. It would be locked into an opportunity for that future of that child. So I’d like to know what it is that the Government saw that was unhealthy—that was the word that was used. It was an “unhealthy” precedent.

💬 Darroch Ball: You asked the officials.

That’s right. We asked the officials. We did not get the response that we wanted—that’s right Mr Darroch Ball. We did not get the response that we wanted. But you know what? We pressed though. Why—because at least another 500 more children that would not have had the opportunity, will do after this bill is passed. It is an interesting point because under Oranga Tamariki as we know it—and I’m happy to be proven wrong; there could be a speech from the Minister over there, the Hon Tracey Martin—to date there has been no enrolment by Oranga Tamariki for foster care children. There’s been no enrolment. So for all the talk and the fact that the provision is there, there has been no enrolment for a foster care child in the custody of Oranga Tamariki. If that’s the case, then why wasn’t there an opportunity to allow this bill, with the amendments that were made? It simply would have allowed them the opportunity to enrol.

I want to acknowledge the examples that were given where young children had the opportunity to begin to save for their future—children as young as 13. It means that a young child can actually start to dream and can have an opportunity to think about what their future could look like. That’s what it was providing. So though the bill is narrow in its focus, it’s purely about KiwiSaver. It’s the principle that we’re arguing for here today in this House. We’ll take it. Why—because it means another 500 children will have that opportunity. But it’s a missed opportunity. This Government has talked about kindness and caring. This Government has often talked about, and has challenged, even at the moment, those words Oranga Tamariki. Up and down the motu, up and down the country, people have been talking about whether that name is appropriate. Well, I think it’s appropriate, because it talks about the wellbeing of children. The name “Vulnerable Children” was taken away. Why—because it looked like it was putting a negative slant on that. So we’ve put this intent in: Oranga Tamariki; the wellbeing of all children.

The Minister has stood up in this House and said that by removing the word “vulnerable” in the end, the intent—and I would agree with her—is to broaden the scope of the oranga, the wellbeing, the welfare, the future intent. In this bill, the KiwiSaver bill, the intent is that all children would have the same opportunities to realise their potential. So I believe it was a missed opportunity. I believe that we could have gone a bit further, but we will support this bill. Why—because it will mean that another 500 children will have that opportunity to be able to be enrolled in KiwiSaver. And we hope that the intent is that in the end, as those children grow to become adults, they will realise the potential of that for their future, not just in homeownership but in other areas as well. I think that’s critically important as well.

I want to acknowledge other organisations, and Mr Hamish Walker talked about Simplicity, who actually came along and made an offer. Isn’t it the spirit of generosity that we see in New Zealand when an organisation actually offered a fees-free, for up to five years, for any of the children in foster care to be enrolled into KiwiSaver? I want to acknowledge the spirit of generosity in which they gave, in order to ensure that this could be something. They saw the injustice. They saw it as an opportunity, so for them it’s probably the best fees-free offer that’s going on. We know that the last fees-free actually was a failure. It didn’t work. Nothing came of it. This, on the other hand, is something that I believe can make a difference. I want to acknowledge those from Simplicity who made that offer, and I hope that offer continues. I hope it’s an opportunity that others may take up as well.

I want to finish there, and I just want to again acknowledge Hamish Walker. Again, it is a fine example of a member of Parliament who has heard from his constituents, has brought a measure right through the House, and has been fortunate—as we all are; we’re at the mercy of the biscuit tin—and got his bill drawn and then was out there actively seeking out all the key stakeholders. He made sure that there were submissions. He made sure that the issues were heard by the advisers as well as this Parliament here today. And it may not be what he intended—what we all would have intended—but at least it’s a win for another 500 children, out of those 6,500 in foster care, who will at least have an opportunity to better their future. I commend this bill to the House.

I too would like to congratulate Hamish Walker very earnestly for bringing this bill to select committee and to the House. The reason it has restrictions on it is quite simply because of the officials and what we learnt at the select committee, which was that foster parents are sometimes there for two weeks. The definition of a foster parent or kin carer does not give us the confidence that we could allow them to make the decision. The decision should be made by the person who is actually the primary carer of the child at the time. That’s what it’s about.

But before I finish, what I must say is that I’m sitting here thinking that the Opposition brought the matter of KiwiSaver to the House—and if they are that concerned about it why in 2014 did they stop the Government contribution? That is what would have done more for children like this. That’s the reality. We are now debating KiwiSaver. What a shame we are not debating about actually bringing back the Government contribution that they stopped. That would have been something that that party could have done for the children of New Zealand. So while we are supporting this bill, just remember to put this whole thing in context.

Kia ora, Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak on the KiwiSaver (Oranga Tamariki Guardians) Amendment Bill. If my memory serves me correctly, I first heard about this bill from Michelle Boag. You might ask yourself why Michelle Boag was talking to me about what ended up being Mr Walker’s member’s bill. Of course, Michelle Boag is the foundation partner of Boag SvG, and if you don’t mind my quoting they are “a strategic communications consultancy specifically structured to help companies and organisations to achieve key outcomes which are vital to their business.” So it’s interesting, in the context of this bill, that they are involved.

It’s my understanding that Mr Stubbs from Simplicity, who has been spoken about by the Opposition members today, had been in conversations with Oranga Tamariki for some time around the ability to increase the number of foster children who had legal guardians who could open KiwiSaver accounts for them. The ministry quite rightly tried to work with Mr Stubbs for a period of time and to also enhance his understanding around the rights of birth parents and the complexities of foster care and the laws of guardianship. Mr Stubbs ended up not being happy with those conversations, and he wanted more children to be signed into Simplicity KiwiSaver accounts. So he contracted Ms Boag to see if he could find a member of Parliament to help him get the outcome he was after, and Ms Boag found Mr Walker. That’s how this member’s bill ended up here in Mr Walker’s name. Now, I’ve actually never been aware of that happening before, but that’s how this member’s bill ended up here.

There are a few other things that I’ve never seen before when it comes to a member’s bill in the last nine years; some of that was around the behaviour that we have seen in this House at second reading, at committee stage, and even in the contribution earlier today. Getting a member’s bill all the way through the House is usually a reason for celebration, and I’d like to be standing here to congratulate the author of this bill on his good fortune. As Mr Ngaro just articulated, it’s at the mercy of the biscuit tin. So, normally, those members of Parliament who are lucky enough to get their bill picked from the ballot recognise how lucky they are, as the odds are stacked against members with regard to getting their bill drawn out.

Usually, we see their behaviour and their articulations around that bill recognise that enormous privilege, that enormous opportunity. Then to have their bill supported by the House, in majority, all the way through to its completion is normally something that a member of Parliament acknowledges their colleagues for. Having been a person who had a bill come out of the biscuit tin in Opposition, who had to work across the House around ways to make it workable, I know what that feels like. So that is what I had hoped to be standing here to do. But, in this case, we have seen something I’ve never seen before with a member’s bill.

💬 Hamish Walker: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Two weeks ago, her leader threw her under the bus twice. I’m not responsible for that—

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! If the member has a genuine point of order he needs to come to it directly, that does not mean making a statement like he did. Does he have a point of order? Then my ruling is it is poor form to interrupt a member who has a right to speak in this House. If the member has a point of order please do make it, of course. But to interrupt a member, and I’m thinking deliberately, is out of order.

💬 Hamish Walker: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. We’ve been here for nearly four minutes. This is about the most vulnerable children in New Zealand. I don’t want to play politics over children, and I don’t think the member’s actually referred to the bill more than once.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): It’s my ruling that it’s the sole discretion of the Speaker to make the decision around the relevancy. My ruling is that, so far, the content of the member’s contribution is relevant to the bill. With another six minutes to go I’m going to expect that the member will make the conclusions that she wants to make, relevant to the bill. But it’s my decision around that; they are debating points.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Speak to the Supplementary Order Paper.

I’m sorry, I thought he was taking a point of order, I do beg your pardon; just shouting from his seat. If we go back to the actual bill and the process of the bill through the House, Mr Hamish Walker—and I stood up at first reading and acknowledged Mr Walker’s intent. I acknowledged the work that Mr Stubbs had done previously with Oranga Tamariki, and the purpose of that. I acknowledged Ms Boag’s contribution, and her conversation with me about attempts to actually make sure that this could be progressed. I acknowledged Mr Walker; even though he appears to continue to articulate a lack of understanding around guardianship laws in New Zealand, he honestly believes that he has done the right thing. With regard to the select committee process, the Social Services and Community Committee did exactly that and got the best possible outcome under current guardianship laws, making sure not to disempower parents further and give Mr Walker an outcome. I believe the number is—the Hon Alfred Ngaro said it was about 500 children, I think it’s more likely 700 children. So that’s a good thing and we should be celebrating that.

However, the officials that—we work in a position of power here, and officials are not allowed to answer us back. Officials are not allowed to go into the public domain and defend themselves. Officials cannot do anything else but sit, at the whim of the member whose bill it is, behind him during a committee stage and be there at his beck and call should he need their help. Yet those officials, in this instance, had to sit there as they were accused of being power-grabbing, heartless—didn’t care about children. That’s an unfortunate adjunct to a bill that should have been able to be celebrated as it went through the House.

The other thing is that it is the reality of many foster children that they do not have families or parents or foster parents who are able to put in a lump sum of money to open a KiwiSaver account. I take on board the comments by Mr O’Connor that it was actually the member’s own party that removed the $1,000 kickstart, which saw close to 200 foster children get KiwiSaver accounts—close to 200 foster children got KiwiSaver accounts while there was a $1,000 kickstart that the member’s own party removed. The member’s own party removed it, so now only those who are wealthy enough to have either parents or caregivers who can put in over a certain threshold can get a $521 top-up from a Government. So it’s ironic that the member stands and articulates that nobody else, and particularly that the officials—the officials who could not answer him, the officials who could not defend themselves when he is in a position of power. It’s ironic that that was what the member did, not only at every reading since the first reading but also, disgustingly, at the committee of the whole House.

The last thing that I want to talk about is the Supplementary Order Paper that Mr Mitchell is so keen for me to talk about. So the Rt Hon Winston Peters was on the AM Show at 6.40 a.m. in the morning on 30 July. Mr Walker’s Supplementary Order Paper was dated 30 July; the Bill’s Office did not open until approximately 9 a.m. on 30 July. Mr Walker stood in committee stage and articulated an interesting perspective around New Zealand First support for something that did not exist. It appears to be a theme with the Opposition at the moment to hold the Government to account for things that do not exist.

We will support the bill to its conclusion. It is a shame that Mr Walker decided to take this particular attitude, because not only will New Zealand First support this bill through to its application, we will work with officials now to try and do better. We will work constructively and collegially without abusing people and shouting at people and belittling them when they have no power to respond. We will work constructively. We will finally do for the children of New Zealand what that party took away. We will finally do for the children of New Zealand what that member says that he wishes to while at the same time fulfilling the very things that the Francis review was asked to make sure that we didn’t have happen.

I always find contributions from the other side of the House on this bill somewhat confusing. We’ve just had a discussion by the member who’s resumed her seat, Tracey Martin, around behaviour and bullying and power and so forth. But, if one reflects on the speech, it’s a rather—maybe it was illustrative of the things that she does not want to happen.

It’s the second time in as many sitting weeks a New Zealand First contribution on a bill of substance—moral substance arguably—has just been a discussion of process, which I find, again, very confusing. I don’t particularly care when the Bills Office chooses to open or when the Rt Hon Winston Peters chooses to turn up for an interview. I want to know what members of the Government—in this particular case, the New Zealand First Party—believe about the wellbeing of children and, in this particular regard, the wellbeing of children under foster care and their ability to access a KiwiSaver account.

I do, though, want to make somewhat initial comments towards the sponsor and initiator and loudest, I think, and rightly, I would hope, proudest advocate of this original bill, and that’s Hamish Walker. He has put forward an excellent idea that, sadly, is not coming to the fruition that it deserves. So my compliments—for want of a better word—to Hamish, first and foremost for being the voice of those most vulnerable, for hearing the voices particularly of those in foster care, taking up their challenge, and bringing their call to Parliament.

I’d also want to acknowledge, on the second line to Hamish Walker, to actually stand steadfast despite the attacks, the change of process, and, effectively, a bill that’s been gutted. I would suggest, and as I go on will attempt to demonstrate, that this bill really doesn’t achieve very much at all. It does have a slight step forward, but as David Lloyd George once said, “You [don’t] cross a chasm in two small jumps.” I think what Hamish Walker was trying to bring to this House was that one large jump, that one bold—and I would suggest—rightful move to allow young people in foster care to be able to have access to a KiwiSaver account.

So let’s start—he says, three minutes in—with the notion of KiwiSaver. KiwiSaver is a good thing, I’m sure all members of this House would agree with that—

💬 Michael Wood: We voted for it on this side, but they voted against it on that side.

The idea that a person is able to put money into—oh, well, we’ll come to the contradictions that have been coming out from the other side. They’ve talked a big game about Government contributions; they might regret that in a few moments. KiwiSaver is a good thing; I don’t think anyone would disagree with that: the ability for any New Zealander to be able to put money aside.

But the suggestions that have come through the Social Services and Community Committee and some subsequent debate is that, somehow, allowing some New Zealanders—in this case, foster children—the ability to have money in KiwiSaver is somehow a bad thing; it might set a dangerous precedent. I have struggled, when I’ve given this some thought, to understand exactly what that bad intention is. I can think of a number of bills before this House, where there are really bad outcomes, mainly because of shoddy lawmaking, usually with badly advised lawyers. It’s just unclear what bad is going to come from this. I suppose one of the suggestions—the only one I could, sort of, begin to reach—was that somehow someone involved with the young person was going to steal their money. Well, I don’t know about other members of this House, but trying to get money out of a KiwiSaver account, even with legitimate reasons, is one of the most difficult processes imaginable—imaginable. In fact, you know, to really illustrate the point, I think KiwiSaver is probably the most difficult structure, for want of a better word, in which to—well, it’s easy to put the money in, unless, of course, you’re a foster child, but it’s immensely, immensely difficult to get it out. So how putting some money in on behalf of a foster child is a bad thing, I just do not understand.

I think one of the objections that was put forward, a pyrrhic in a way, was that: “Oh, you know, foster parents might only be with that child for a couple of weeks.” Well, I don’t particularly care. I mean, in the sense it’s the nature of foster care. But if those foster parents, for the sake of argument, over one or two weeks—or, gosh, let’s really make it extreme: for one or two days, show the wherewithal in care for a young person that they are prepared to open an account for them and put money in; how is that a bad thing? How are those foster parents going to cause any harm? Their opening an account for little Jack or little Mary is not going to entitle said foster parent of one day, two days, two weeks, or three years, any entitlement to that money.

So what we end up with here now is a bill—and we will support it because there is just that vague notion of good intention left in it, and there’s some debate about whether 500 or 700 young people will be helped, and that’s a good thing; the fact that, you know, almost 5,500 others are not is unfortunate. Again, it’s a missed opportunity, but we will support it.

But what, effectively, this bill does is, I would argue, and others may take a different point of view, it, effectively, just entrenches the existing system. It’s just a change of language, and it’s illustrated by the fact that so much energy was put to changing the bill, which Hamish Walker put forward, I think, quite smartly: KiwiSaver—and then in brackets—(Foster Parents Opting in for Children in their Care) Amendment Bill; which, I would say is a slightly long title, but, actually, I’m all for, you know, clear language of what it intends to do, and that’s exactly what it intends to do. As is a bit de rigueur in this House now, we’ve ended up with a title that doesn’t really mean much. We’ve just thrown in the words “Oranga Tamariki Guardians” instead, which really just reinforces what already exists in the law, which is that the guardian, and often what used to be Child, Youth and Family, have to sign-off. So there isn’t actually a lot of change; we’re still requiring a guardian to step in. These are substantial—substantial—hurdles for the young people to go through.

What I would want to put to the Government, even though they are supporting this small step, and I think people at home need to understand that while, I believe, the whole House is supporting this, but we’ll find out soon—it’s not supporting the initial and reasonable attempts of the member to make a substantial change. It’s simply allowing—in a sense, redressing or dressing up in a different way—what already occurs, which is the young person has to go through substantial hurdles, including now going to Oranga Tamariki and asking the chief executive or through their delegation, for permission for this good, which is a KiwiSaver, to be opened. So I suppose I am putting the question, then, to the Government that, well, they often like an argument which is, effectively, “Who will think of the children?”; they do it often, they use lots of nice virtue-signalling words and so forth. There is no harm in what Hamish Walker had put forward; there was only good.

But one of the counterarguments—which is rather tangential, but I suppose it’s somewhat related to KiwiSaver—is that we’ve been challenged because a previous Government dropped the Government cash contribution, and that somehow this is a huge knockout blow of why we should discriminate against young people in foster care. It might not have dawned on the other side that if you are not allowed to open an account as a foster child, it doesn’t matter if there was or was not a contribution of $1,000—actually, it was $1,012, if I recall correctly. It doesn’t make any sense. I think it was my somewhat eponymous namesake across the other side who was railing against the fact that a previous Government took away the cash contribution and that’s the reason why we should continue to deny young people in foster care access to KiwiSaver. Well, again, I just repeat for the sake of clarity: there is no contribution if you cannot open an account, period.

But, then, I suppose the final challenge is—because we’ve heard huge talk from the other side about this $1,000 contribution: this terrible injustice which occurred under a previous Government. So I’d love one of the other side—and I see Paul Eagle, he’s a good man, a good man. I’ve probably destroyed his reputation now by praising him in the House; I’ll withdraw and apologise if required. But there has been so much talk about this great evil that has been done: the withdrawal of $1,000 from people that, again, foster children couldn’t get. Will there be any gumption on the other side by Government members to stand, to take a call, and then at the finish of their call, to seek the leave of the House to immediately debate that we resume having $1,000 Government contributions? Will the Government actually stand by their debate today and say that not only will they support foster children but they will be announcing another spend. I mean, they’ve spent billions of dollars—just go and talk to Shane Jones. So let’s listen, in these last seconds, to whether the Government will actually announce that they’re going to make a return to $1,000 per year per person: no, not a sausage.

Kia ora, e Te Mana Whakawā. In response to that member, Simon O’Connor, and what the bad intentions of this bill are: well, it is about the erosion of the guardians’ right—only guardians can open a KiwiSaver. And might I say, it is because of a Labour Government who had a long-term view for the best for New Zealand that we have this KiwiSaver.

There are 1,124,040 young people under the age of 18 years old, who all have guardians—who all have guardians. We are born into guardianship, and the only time that guardianship is changed is through the court. It’s only through the court that they change the guardianship—through the court. So this bill: I am in support of it, because it is saying that at the hands of the highest powers of the land, the court can change what a guardian is.

I want to acknowledge the Prime Minister, who says that this is the best place to be a child. We are looking at this for the long term. I commend this bill to the House. Mālō ‘aupito.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s a pleasure to rise in support of this bill, the KiwiSaver (Oranga Tamariki Guardians) Amendment Bill. The Green Party has a long history of supporting measures that make New Zealand more equal, in particular when it comes to our youngest Kiwis, and we have a long history of supporting KiwiSaver. In fact, we have a policy where we believe that every child in New Zealand should have a KiwiSaver account with a $1,000 contribution by the Government that they can access when they turn 18. That’s in recognition of the inequality that children face in our society and a widening gap that has been happening for decades now, but, in particular, over the last decade, when New Zealand has been breaking inequality records, and our child poverty stats have been criticised by international agencies, by the IMF, by the United Nations. We would like to do everything we can to make New Zealand more equal.

When children turn 18, they should have the kinds of opportunities that we all hope for our own children. They should have the option of studying, of taking up higher education, expensive apprenticeships, buying a car, travelling. At the moment, those things are not realistic for a vast number of children in New Zealand. We feel that that shouldn’t depend on your family make-up, on the generational wealth, and this bill goes some way to make that a reality for children in foster care. So it does enable foster parents, who have committed to long-term care arrangements, to enrol children in KiwiSaver. It clarifies care arrangements. It does something that will benefit those children in the long term, which is to introduce them to a tradition of saving as well, which is always good. It’s something that my parents certainly instilled upon me, and we certainly didn’t have a lot when we first came to New Zealand, so I have valued that particular skill as well.

But this is something that will become part of the fabric of New Zealand culture for those children, and it’s something that they didn’t have access to before, which, actually, has been quite a shame. So I do commend the bill to the House. I hope that it will be part of a suite of measures as we go forward, and I know that it will be, as part of this Government’s commitment to addressing both child poverty, and inequality, generally, in New Zealand. Thank you.

I call Agnes Loheni—five minutes.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise in support of this bill, and it’s unfortunate that members of the Government have taken this opportunity to undermine the character of my colleague Hamish Walker during this debate. I would like to commend Hamish in using his voice, his platform, to advocate for foster kids. So I’m pleased to be on the Social Services and Community Committee. So during the course of this bill, we received 19 submissions. One of the submissions, to me, that really highlights the selflessness of this issue—and, also, I think it was my colleague Alfred who spoke of the spirit of generosity—was a submission by a caregiver Sheryl Blythen. If I just quote from her submission, “I know it’s impractical for me to expect to be able to be involved in these children’s lives until they become adults and beyond. But the one thing I could do while they were in my care to help them in the future is contribute a lump sum I could afford to a Kiwisaver account.”

So I had no idea, before this issue came to light before me on the select committee, that this was an issue for these kids, for these foster parents, for the foster kids; the numerous hurdles that they face, the brick walls that get up that put barriers in their way. To do something selfless, which can provide long-term benefits to their foster child; it’s an act of love for that foster child—caring for them. It’s a child that they have not a long-term connection with. So I think that is particularly generous for these foster parents to want to be able to do that for that child. I was even more surprised at what appeared to be a very reasonable request by the member Hamish—an issue which relates to equity for these children—would be met by such resistance during the passage of this bill.

I support this bill, because, ultimately, 500 more foster kids will have access to a KiwiSaver account, and that’s a good thing. Of course, it would’ve been better if we could’ve made that happen for the remaining 5,500 foster kids where this bill won’t reach. So I was disappointed that Labour, New Zealand First, and the Green Party, voted down Hamish’s Supplementary Order Paper, which did seek to, ultimately, bring his intent closer in line with this bill. A KiwiSaver account is something that we all take for granted in this House. Everyone is automatically signed up when they start working. So I just want to comment on one of the comments from the other side today in the debate around the erosion of guardian rights. Well, actually, if those guardians were in the lives of these kids, those guardians could actually open a KiwiSaver account for these children. The issue is that they’re not. So they’re in the day-to-day care of the foster parents.

Several submitters raised concerns, and it was also raised by member Greg O’Connor, about short-term foster parents not being the ones best placed to give long-term financial support for that foster child. My response to that is what does it matter if that foster parent is in there short-term, long-term? Where is the risk in having someone who has an opportunity to open up this store for these foster kids? I’ve not really heard a good explanation of where that risk lies, because, as we all know in this House, only the foster kid—as they get older—can actually access that account. No one is forcing a foster parent to contribute to the KiwiSaver account. It’s just an opportunity to have something there in future for that child.

So I’m sorry that the member Hamish Walker couldn’t get the full intent of his member’s bill realised here today. I understand that Oranga Tamariki has indicated that it will review its procedures, and so, hopefully, that does happen so that we can get that door open for the remaining 5,500 children. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

I call Ginny Andersen—five minutes.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak on the KiwiSaver (Oranga Tamariki Guardians) Amendment Bill. Now, I think it’s great that a good National Party lad like Hamish Walker loves KiwiSaver so much that he wants to make it have its widest reach possible. I commend the member for having that good intent. You know, a question: where was that a while ago?—I guess he wasn’t in Government back then. So the point being that the main change that this bill has gone through when the select committee process has occurred is that to extend it as far as those caregivers who are in short-term arrangements has some concerns, and that’s where the submissions stepped in there. So to address the issue that the previous member raised, it was considered that it would be out of step with current legislation, and current practice, where they are temporary caregivers. The key reasons for this is that there were concerns that short-term foster parents may not be the best-placed to consider what is a long-term financial interest of the child.

Also at select committee, there were concerns raised about the situations where foster care arrangements are short term, and may change over time. The third one that was raised by submitters also was that a child’s subsequent caregivers may have different views about finances, including KiwiSavers. So it’s important that we acknowledge that everyone is due a right, but it’s also important that that role is safeguarded—what that role is in looking after a child. I think that it’s fantastic that we have such strong support from across the House for KiwiSaver, and it’s such a marvellous scheme. It’s great to see it continuing for many years yet. I commend this bill to the House.

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. I’m privileged to stand in the third reading of the Hamish Walker bill, the KiwiSaver (Oranga Tamariki Guardians) Amendment Bill. I just want to acknowledge Hamish on the work that he has done—a really passionate young man. I see that on many, many occasions in his discussions within our caucus, within a number of meetings where he is speaking, and this bill is really a reflection of the passion that he gives to his role within this Parliament. I also want to acknowledge the submitters to this bill and the passion that they gave in their submissions and the time that they took to formulate what they wanted to say in their contributions at the select committee process.

I just want to make a few comments around some of the things that I’ve heard in the House tonight. So I’m just going to start around the idea of equity of opportunity, which my colleague Alfred Ngaro spoke about in his contribution, and I want to talk a little bit about that from a personal perspective. So our family many years ago we had a foster child. He came to us when he was seven years old and he became my stepbrother. We asked his parents, my aunt and uncle, if we could adopt him, and they said no, so he remained as our foster brother. He died two years ago and all of the times we sat around the tūpāpaku we recited some of the things and recalled some of the things that happened when he was our foster brother—or our stepbrother.

A couple of things around this bill and KiwiSaver and access for foster kids to KiwiSaver accounts. So when my brother came to us—as I said, he was seven years old—we had bank accounts as children. Our parents made sure that we had bank accounts and my stepbrother or my foster brother actually got access to the same privilege of being able to have his own bank account—very much similar to what a KiwiSaver account is today. He was able to have that. It started for him a habit of saving, and a very good habit. All of that was squashed when he went back to his real parents, but anyway, the point being is that back then—and this was a few years ago—we had and he was given an opportunity to have his own bank account that only he could access, that my parents would put money into every week through the school banking system.

So this bill actually reflects a lot of what happened back then today and I think that it’s really good and a lot of foresight’s gone into this bill and thank you very much to Hamish for doing that for the foster children of New Zealand. Somebody does need to speak up for them. As we’ve heard, many of them have come from traumatic backgrounds. They’ve seen things that there’ll be many of us in this House have never seen and will never see in our lifetimes. And so this KiwiSaver bill is an opportunity for them to be able to have savings for their future and so I do applaud Hamish for this.

I also want to just comment a little bit around what Greg O’Connor talked about over trusting foster carers. You know, if we have foster carers that we trust enough to be able to look after or foster children then surely we are able to trust them to be able to open a KiwiSaver account for those foster children if they wish. Remember, this is not compulsory; it just opens a way through. Surely we are able to trust them enough to be able to put money in and open a KiwiSaver for the foster children that they have. And I think it’s very honourable when foster carers do that. And I’ve known a number of foster carers, since my parents were ones, as I went through my adulthood, and some of the love and the care and the support that these foster carers give to the foster children is nothing short of admirable.

I also want to make a comment around access to the KiwiSaver. As far as I know, the only person that can access KiwiSaver is the person that the name of the KiwiSaver is in. And so you know, if there is fear around corruption or coercion around that savings scheme then that is actually why the benefit is in the name of the foster child or children.

And so I think that this bill, you know, it’s an opportunity. It would be great if it went more, as Tracey Martin said—there are not 500 but 700 foster children of the 6,000 that will be able to have a KiwiSaver account. It would be great if that could actually broaden out and give an opportunity for all foster children to have a KiwiSaver account.

I want to make a comment around a contribution that was put in the House around undermining guardians and the role of guardians through this bill. I don’t think this bill undermines guardians. I think the guardians should be very pleased that people are taking interest in their child right through—so giving them an opportunity. So I don’t think, you know—all the negatives that I’ve heard. This bill does not have any—very few if not no—negatives about it. It is empowering and that’s, at the end of the day, why we’re here in Parliament. It is to be an empowering Parliament, to empower children, to look after children. And I always thought that, you know, the wellbeing and the welfare of children was one of the mantras of this Government. It seems that that may not be the case; we’ve heard some of the contributions from that side of the House.

As the sponsor of the bill talked about—the name change. He’s done everything he can to get his bill through: “Oranga Tamariki Guardians” to place it there with Oranga Tamariki so that the chief executive of Oranga Tamariki can actually—it’s about part and parcel of this. Everything that Hamish has tried to do to appease everybody’s concerns he has done and you can only but admire the guy for the work that he’s done. And so I am so pleased that I can stand here today and be part and parcel of commending this bill to the House and the work that Hamish has done. He has done a number of other amazing mahi in his electorate and I think they’re very lucky to have him, and I, as I said, commend this bill to the House. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

I’d like to make a brief contribution and a positive contribution to this debate. This bill appears to be on track to pass in the House today and that’s positive in a number of respects. I acknowledge the member Hamish Walker for getting a member’s bill through the House, it would seem, that will make a positive difference to people. There are approximately 500 to 700 foster children who will potentially gain access to KiwiSaver under the provisions of this bill. I feel positive because members across the House and on this side of the House have engaged with the content of the bill and have got to the point of having a workable piece of legislation that navigates the complex issues around foster care in respect of rights of guardianship that are very real issues.

I also very feel very positive because after 13 years of voting against KiwiSaver at virtually every single turn from its inception in 2006—and I quote here from a National speaker in that debate: “National will not support KiwiSaver. We do not think it will work enormously in its current form. … There is no incentive on employers to encourage this scheme, and the Minister of Finance has once again—as he so often does—got it horribly wrong.” and I acknowledge the former Prime Minister the Right Hon John Key as the leader of the National Party for his contribution to the KiwiSaver debate in 2006.

The reality is that party has voted and spoken against KiwiSaver at every turn. They gutted it in their previous term of Government, but the good news today is that they seem to be finally coming to their senses and supporting members and parties on this side of the House who know that KiwiSaver, which has built up savings of $50 billion in New Zealand for the benefit of New Zealanders in their retirement, is a good scheme. That’s some good news. I’m happy about that and I commend the bill to the House. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker, and I too stand in support of this bill, which began its life when it was drawn from the ballot as the KiwiSaver (Foster Parents Opting in for Children in their Care) Amendment Bill, but as we’ve heard in many contributions today it is now the KiwiSaver (Oranga Tamariki Guardians) Amendment Bill. For reasons that have been well canvassed this afternoon, the Social Services and Community Committee did run into some difference of opinion about who should be able to opt in for children in their care in setting up a KiwiSaver account. And it’s obvious today that this is where the different sides of the House have come to different conclusions, because in the original intent of the bill this was to provide all care-experienced children with the opportunity to have a secure and tamper-proof way of saving for their future and building up a nest egg whether it was to help them into the first homes or to provide for their security in their retirement.

It was very disappointing, at the beginning of the Minister’s contribution, that the Hon Tracey Martin spent five minutes talking about the origin of this issue and when it became a problem for a foster parent—and to think that the Minister has criticised and tried to paint a negative picture around the fact that a foster parent had to use an advocate to work with the Government to try and get this bill to where it is today and the fact that, after a year of working with the Government, they had come up against a brick wall, and so that foster parent went and spoke with Hamish Walker, the great electorate MP of Clutha-Southland. It was at that point that Hamish Walker found that he was not going to let down these children, that he was going to be their advocate, and he is the one that put this member’s bill in the ballot, and, very fortunate for him and for foster children, he got it drawn.

It is a shame that when this originated, when the conversation first started, it was actually the Government side of the House that refused to pick this up and run with it. So I pay huge tribute to Hamish Walker for his commitment to these kids and trying to secure their future.

In terms of the process that we’ve gone through, again I pay tribute to Hamish Walker because he has managed the process with dignity and he has managed it with passion. It became very clear, in the talks that he had had with foster carers around the country, that this was something that they were all very excited about because they all felt very deeply for the children in their care.

It is a shame that we have got to the point now where this bill now is only addressing those who have guardianship for these children. So we are a little bit watered down from where we started, but there are approximately 500 to 700 children in care that will benefit from the passage of this bill today. But we do leave behind about 6,000 other children who will not see this benefit.

It was interesting, as we worked through the select committee process, that one of the resounding comments that came from our submitters—those care-experienced children—was that they, simply, wanted to be treated equally. We’ve heard that today about equality—about equal opportunities—but the reality is that for children in care, whether they have legal guardians or foster parents, they don’t have that equality, as a result of the watered-down part of this bill.

One of the issues that came up and that we talked in some depth about in the select committee was about that saving scheme for children. It was something that came up often in the submissions, but it was a place—and KiwiSaver is the only financial instrument that is tamper-proof by anyone except the owner of that account, and in this case KiwiSaver is that only financial instrument—where grandparents, aunties, and uncles or existing or former caregivers can actually make contributions to that account, where it is safe, and where it cannot be accessed by anyone else. As I said earlier, it is that instrument that provides these children with financial security as they work towards homeownership or their retirement.

Throughout the process through the select committee, we heard submissions and we heard feedback from the officials—and the Minister has referred to that in her contribution today—that the CEO, being the legal guardian of foster children, is the only one that can open a KiwiSaver account. But, along the way, there were other issues that were raised too—for instance, around identification or getting passports. One submitter told us at the end of last year that they had applied for an IRD number in 2016 and they were still waiting in 2018 for that to be processed. So when we say that the CEO of Oranga Tamariki can open a KiwiSaver account, we understand that the CEO does have other priorities, and we saw, with the submissions, that it tends to not be at the top of the priority list for the time that is invested in doing this. And so it has fallen down the priority list, and it does not get the attention and the action. So that’s why this bill giving the foster parents the ability to open the account was going to be so significant for them.

But we did hear from officials that, in highlighting those barriers to getting identification—whether it’s a photo ID, whether it was a passport application, or whether it was an IRD number—because it had been highlighted through the passage of this bill, that there would be some improvements in the systems and there would be a speeding up of some of those applications for those things. So we do look forward in the future to those internal processes working a lot more smoothly for the children in care.

Also, we heard very strongly about the pressure on a social worker’s time and that, you know, things like getting these IDs are not their top priority. Completely understand that. I think it’s an opportunity for us to pay tribute to the social workers that are dealing with these children on a day-to-day basis. I thank them most heartily for the contribution that they make to the lives of those foster children and children who come under the guardianship of Oranga Tamariki. It’s certainly not the easiest job in the world, but I imagine and hope that for many of them it is a very rewarding position, so I give a big shout-out to our social workers who are out there in the field.

As I said before, about the processes, the red tape and the barriers we see as a positive outcome of the process, even though we’re not giving the full benefit of this original intention of Hamish Walker’s bill. But we still commend the work that’s been done by the select committee—unfortunately, not getting to the outcome that we had hoped. But we know that the 500 or 700 children in care that are going to benefit from this bill are going to have a lot more financial security in their lives, and, as you, I’m sure, will agree—and as both sides of the House will agree—that is a very positive outcome for all of these children. I thank you for the opportunity, and I commend this bill to the House.

Bill read a third time.