New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Legislation Amendment Bill
I move, That the New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Legislation Amendment Bill be now read a third time.
The New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Legislation Amendment Bill is an important step in ensuring our superannuation system reflects our contemporary society. From 9 November 2020, different rates of superannuation will continue to be paid based on whether a person is single or in a relationship, but someone will not be able to receive superannuation because their partner does. They will need to meet the age and residence criteria themselves unless they are already included in their partner’s superannuation at the time the bill commences. If someone receives a Government-administered overseas pension, it will continue to be deducted from their own New Zealand superannuation or veteran’s pension, but if one partner in a couple gets an overseas pension, the bill means that it won’t be deducted from their partner’s superannuation unless one partner is included as a non-qualified partner. These changes reflect the change we’ve seen in society away from the male breadwinner model, where women were not expected to work outside the home and would be dependent on someone who might be forced to retire at pension age. They reinforce the core settings and purpose of New Zealand superannuation and veteran’s pension while contributing to their sustainability.
In the future, partners of superannuitants or veterans pensioners, like all New Zealanders, will be supported through the welfare system if and when eligible. The bill makes some changes to legislation regarding income tests, hospital rates, and special disability allowances to ensure these work as expected when a couple receive benefits paid under two different Acts. This bill also makes a range of improvements to the clarity and consistency of policy and legislation. The bill clarifies that if a person made voluntary contributions to a Government-administered overseas pension scheme, the proportion of the overseas pension that is based on those voluntary contributions won’t be deducted from their New Zealand superannuation or veteran’s pension. The bill also includes, for the first time, a provision for people who volunteer overseas with a secular charitable organisation to have that period of service counted towards the residence requirements. There’s already a provision like this for missionaries, and the bill clarifies that missionary work should have some connection to a New Zealand organisation to count towards the residence requirements.
Single people who live alone in a self-contained mobile home will be able to receive the living alone rate. The current practice of setting the net weekly amount of superannuation for a couple who both qualify at no less than 66 percent of the net average weekly wage will be protected in legislation so it cannot be lowered without Parliament’s agreement. These changes are important for the groups who are affected and, in the case of protecting the current wage link, for the long-term stability of New Zealand superannuation and veteran’s pension.
I want to briefly address the fact that this bill was originally intended to commence on 1 July 2020 and that the commencement has had to be delayed until November 2020. This has been unavoidable due to the need for the Ministry of Social Development to deal with a significant increase in demand for services due to COVID-19 and to introduce a number of complex products and services during this unprecedented event. However, while it might be happening a little later than expected, I’m proud that this bill will make important steps to modernise and simplify New Zealand superannuation and veteran’s pension. I know that a number of MPs across the House have been lobbied on some of the issues addressed in this bill, not least of which is the spousal deduction policy. It’s always good when we have instances where parties across the House can agree on legislative change. This is one of those instances, so I do acknowledge all the parties in the House for their support, and I commend this bill to the House.
Thank you.
ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): Oh, sorry. The question is that the motion be agreed to. My apologies.
Thank you, and no need to apologise, Madam Speaker. I’m just grateful to have the opportunity to contribute to this debate and, on behalf of National, to lead off on this, the third and final reading. I confirm, before going any further, that National continues to support this legislation. We support its broad intent and, indeed, the detail within that.
I’d like to make a number of remarks under the themes of the consistency that this legislation is seeking to introduce to a number of different pieces of legislation that are currently on the statute book; also talk about the extent to which the Parliament, by passing this Act, will be modernising a couple of different regimes; and, finally, just talk about some of the detail that is important. I acknowledge that the Minister for Social Development has gone through a certain amount of that detail already. I think it would be risky for me to try to paraphrase that in a way that might lead to more confusion, not less. Some of that detail that we’ve heard about—and that, indeed, is contained in the bill, obviously, in some considerable length—should not be confused. The provisions regarding spousal deduction and the extent to which benefits and allowances are calculated or recalculated, depending upon the status of one’s spouse and overseas pension—that’s material not to be trifled with, so I don’t intend to do so. But I do think it’s helpful just to note a couple of the particular aspects of the bill in which the detail is significant, because it points to the intent of the Parliament in passing the bill, and I hope that anyone who is listening to the debate or should wish to go back and check later will understand what it is that we have been engaged in through this process.
Speaking of process, I wasn’t on the relevant select committee at the time that the bill was going through and receiving submissions. I’ve done my best to get up to speed on that, but I do just want to acknowledge, none the less, those who did contribute to the debate by appearing before the select committee, by submitting in written form as well, and, of course, all those involved in its passage so far—officials and members of Parliament on all sides of the House alike.
I mentioned before that the passing of this bill is an exercise in ensuring some consistency. There are a couple of different regimes involved. One is superannuation in the general, broad sense of that phrase, also the veteran’s pension schemes, and I note that the Minister for Veterans is in the House, and no doubt he’s taking some interest in this, as well as other legislation that is currently passing through this place. Suffice it to say that we believe, in National—and I suspect and hope that other parties would agree—that changes that are made to the superannuation scheme that applies to all New Zealanders should not leave behind veterans. Certainly, at the very least, the changes should ensure consistency between those such that veterans aren’t inadvertently excluded from any benefits that are brought by this bill.
The fact that it’s an omnibus bill reflects that there are a number of different pieces of legislation that are being changed. I won’t go through all of those, but suffice to say they’re in the retirement, social security, and taxation policy spaces. Of course, it’s important that they all interrelate, and the bill does the things that it should do in relation to making consequential amendments and, of course, ensuring that those all tie in together pretty well.
I talked before about the second of the three major themes that I wanted to highlight. That was around modernisation. I think an example of that is the fact that changes are made to ensure that those who serve overseas in a charitable capacity are not disadvantaged by the fact that the nature of that work is secular or the characterisation of that is secular. That’s consistent with a view that I think is pretty universally held: that the affairs of Church and State should be kept separate, in most instances, certainly. And I think it’s appropriate—and we in National think it’s appropriate—that people who are engaged in doing good generally overseas are not penalised, as I say, by the fact of the particular delivery of that not being ostensibly by a faith-based organisation.
It’s worth noting, I suppose, in the general policy context of what we’re discussing, that New Zealanders are living longer, and many seniors will no doubt take an interest in different policies relating to superannuation ahead of the upcoming election. That, however, is not particularly the subject of this bill, and there’s, obviously, discussions that could be had around that in a separate kind of way. But I think what isn’t in doubt—again, I would say, hopefully, across the House—is that senior New Zealanders do contribute heavily to this nation. They provide help and assistance in many different ways, sometimes still formally in the workforce, as we understand that phrase in its usual kind of a way, but also often in a volunteer capacity, whether formal or informal. By recognising in some small way that work that’s undertaken perhaps to support family or the community is work that’s worthy of being recognised as such—notwithstanding that it’s not employment with a capital “E”—that’s a useful thing that we can do through this bill as well.
The detail—as I promised earlier, I wouldn’t look to get too deep into that. But I think it’s worth noting that the bill is careful to recognise situations where an overseas pension is entered into by the spouse—or partner, roughly speaking—of a person who themselves is eligible for New Zealand superannuation or a veteran’s pension. There has been contention for many years—and a number of us will be aware of it as MPs who have received correspondence from constituents—that a person who is contributing to an overseas scheme that has a voluntary component feel, sometimes, as though they have been penalised by the fact of having made those voluntary contributions overseas because the New Zealand regime has, until now, in some cases, regarded those as overseas pensions to reduce the amount of New Zealand super to which a person’s entitled. Anyway, suffice to say that that’s, I think, helpful and useful and, frankly, a fair change that the bill is looking to make. Again, on this side of the House, we support that.
The final comments I’ll make relate to a bit of the detail, because I think it’s interesting as much as anything. One is to be found in Part 1; the other in Part 2. They’re pretty similar—in fact, mirror provisions, so far as I can tell on a brief look. The “Meaning of living alone”, which sounds a bit like it might be something that a Bee Gees song focuses on.
💬 Hon Tim Macindoe: Sing it for us.
Mr Macindoe’s suggesting that I sing “I don’t want to live alone” by the Bee Gees, but, I think, in the interest of “Stayin’ Alive”, I will not do that. No, I’m not going to go there.
I thought, nevertheless, what was interesting under the heading of the “Meaning of living alone”—section 159 amended in clause 25, or replacement section 4A in clause 5, depending upon whether one’s looking at the Veteran’s Support Act amendments or amendments to the New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Act—was the condition relating to the occupation of a different kind of dwelling. We’ve got a house or a flat; we’ve got a boat or craft moored within the following sea or waters, which include any waters within New Zealand that are a lake, estuary, lagoon, river, stream, creek, or other waters. That seems to me impressively detailed and broad in such a way that the gentleman—I presume it was a gentleman who wrote the first thesaurus: “Rodget”. I may not have even pronounced that correctly.
💬 Hon Member: Roget.
Roget—that’s one for the Hansard people to consider and that I owe them a drink over again. Anyway, don’t know what you’d do without your thesaurus, as the saying goes. I’d probably be lost for words if I were to lose it.
Anyway, I’ll leave my contribution there, except to say that we do continue to support the bill for all the reasons I’ve said and also some much more worthy ones that colleagues no doubt will go through at this, the third and final reading.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. This bill makes—I’m sorry; it’s just the contribution of the previous speaker just leaves me lost for words, frankly. But anyway, this bill makes a few substantive changes that will contribute to the sustainability of NZ super and the veteran’s pension, and, as previous speakers have said, it modernises existing legislation and improves its consistency and clarity.
Some of the main changes that it makes—and I won’t go into a huge amount of detail. Unlike the previous speaker, I actually won’t go into a lot of detail. But basically, it removes the non-qualified partner provision. The Minister has already gone into detail as to what that means. The reason that it’s been removed is because contexts have changed: people are working longer, and often both partners are working, as well.
In addition to that, the bill also removes the spousal deduction, which makes things a lot fairer, frankly, because the change means that superannuitants won’t have their own entitlement—and that includes the winter energy payment—reduced simply because their partner is getting an overseas pension.
So this is a bill that makes a fair few changes, as I said previously, to improve the consistency of the bill. Given that it’s the third reading of the bill, I just want to acknowledge the Minister, the Hon Carmel Sepuloni, for her work to get the bill to where it’s at today at its third reading. Also, my fellow select committee members on the Social Services and Community Committee, we had some really good discussions about this bill. Also want to thank submitters who took their time out to submit to the bill and officials who helped us with the process along the way. I commend this bill to the House.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. I can assure you that I won’t be bringing the Bee Gees into my contribution in the New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Legislation Amendment Bill for the third reading. I did see, Madam Speaker, your wry smile, and I thought, “I shall stay away from such a topic.” I’m not so bold as my colleague Chris Penk.
This is a piece of legislation, obviously, that the National Party is supporting. It’s really important with the fact that we have more of our seniors who are living longer, and they have made a significant contribution through employment and through family and volunteer roles over their lifetime, and we want to make sure that they are well supported in their golden years.
So the relationship status is relevant in terms of eligibility for the New Zealand Superannuation and veteran’s pension in three ways, which I’ll just touch on. The first is what they receive is dependent on their relationship status: if they’re single and what their living arrangements are. For a qualifying New Zealand Superannuation or veteran’s pension recipient, they can choose to include their partner who doesn’t qualify, and that might be that they don’t qualify based on their age or their current residency status in their New Zealand Superannuation or veteran’s pension, and that would be subject to an income test. Then if one partner’s entitlement is to a Government-administered overseas pension that exceeds their entitlement to a benefit or pension, the excess is deducted from the entitlement of the other partner, and this is commonly referred to as the spousal deduction.
As my colleague Chris Penk said, members of Parliament often get letters of complaint about the spousal deduction, and in the select committee process there was a resounding support of that change from submitters. So it is always encouraging for those who make a submission to the legislation that we pay attention to what they say. And it’s really important in terms of this change that the majority of the submitters did actually support it. On the other hand, the non-qualifying partners provision wasn’t quite so overwhelmingly supported.
The reality is that we need to take every opportunity to modernise and simplify our legislation, and these are just a couple of examples where it can be quite complicated. This is making it fairer and it’s also making it simpler. But for us in the National Party, one of the things that is really important is that the New Zealand Superannuation scheme is sustainable, and it’s for that reason that we have campaigned and will continue to campaign on progressively increasing the age of entitlement from 65 to 67. It’s not starting for a few years—2037—so there’s plenty of time for people to get prepared for that.
The sustainability is really important. If we look at what’s happening in New Zealand at the moment—the impacts of COVID—there’ll be significant debt that’s taken on by the Government, and that’ll be for future generations to pay off. So it is really important, on this side of the House, that we have a New Zealand Superannuation scheme that is sustainable. We were disappointed that Jacinda Ardern had the opportunity to also stick with their former policy of lifting the age of entitlement but backed off it. We would have preferred that we could have had a situation across the Parliament where there was general agreement about making the New Zealand Superannuation scheme more sustainable for generations to come.
So the other speakers have covered the detail of this bill. It is supported by the National Party, and I commend the bill to the House.
New Zealand First still supports this bill and commends it to the House.
I haven’t even had a chance to do my warm-up, Madam Speaker. I am very disappointed; I was genuinely looking forward to hearing the Hon Ron Mark’s contribution on this bill. Given his ministerial portfolios, I assumed that he would spend a little bit of time treating us to the benefit of his thoughts on it. I can only assume that he does genuinely feel that it is a valuable bill.
I don’t think there’s any question that all New Zealanders would wish to see our superannuation scheme being one that is fair, one that enables those who have qualified for it to live in a degree of dignity. Obviously, you’ll never get rich on superannuation, but you can—I would hope—be able to enjoy a quality of life that is appropriate for people who have, in many cases, served our country if they’re veterans; and in all cases, given us the benefit of their considerable contributions over a lifetime.
So I am very pleased to support this bill, and I’m delighted to see that it has reached a point where we are about to be able to commit it to the law of the land. I’ve mentioned that I think all New Zealanders want to see a system that is fair, and that means that they need to have certain guarantees. Therefore, it is also important that, wherever possible, we can reach a broad bipartisan agreement over superannuation policy. I think that we have seen over many years now that this House is committed to doing that. I’m pleased to see that the chief whip for the Labour Party clearly not only agrees with me but is thoroughly enjoying this contribution.
💬 Michael Wood: Just waiting to hear the member’s thoughts on clause 2 of the bill.
Well, I thought I’d wait for the member himself to do that, because I know that he—I defer to his great wisdom, and I know that he’ll want to give one of his electrifying 30-second concluding speeches at the end of the bill. I’m still actually trying to figure out which Bee Gees song I could possibly give, possibly even move on to the Beach Boys, I thought, since—
ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): Feel free to move on to the bill.
Madam Speaker, how very generous of you. OK, well, I don’t think it is actually necessary for me to say much more other than to say that I do commend the work that has been done. I’m pleased that the House has reached this point and look forward to seeing it enacted.
Kia ora, Madam Speaker. Ngā mihi nui ki a koutou. Kia ora. I rise to support, on behalf of the Green Party, this bill. I think it’s a very positive change to the approach to superannuation—a fairer approach. Look, I’m not going to take the House’s time, but as the chairperson I want to thank everyone on the Social Services and Community Committee that improved the legislation, all the submitters—and there were a number of them. It’s a good example of how legislation can be improved, and I’d like to acknowledge everyone. Kia ora koutou.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. It’s a pleasure to rise and stand on the third reading of the New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Legislation Amendment Bill. As has been traversed in the House so far tonight, the National Party supports this bill. I’m pleased to have been a member on the committee, and I also wish to acknowledge my fellow colleagues on the Social Services and Community Committee that oversaw this bill through, and also I’d like to acknowledge our chair, Gareth Hughes, who’s just resumed his seat. I just also want to acknowledge those submitters that put through their submissions on this bill—there were 50 submissions. I would just note that the prominent themes that came through in the submissions were the non-qualified partner provision, the removal of the spousal deduction—probably about half of the submissions were on that one—and the reform of the direct deduction generally. I just want to also acknowledge the Minister, Carmel Sepuloni, for her collaboration in the process of this bill.
Ultimately, we’re acknowledging, as National, a commitment to respect and support our seniors, our veterans, in this bill. I noted in my second reading speech on this bill that in 2001, less than 12 percent of our population were 65 years and plus, and in March 2020, that number went up to 16 percent. So, clearly, New Zealanders are living longer, and many of our seniors contribute hugely and immensely to our communities through employment, through family support, and through the volunteering roles that they do. So we are committed to ensuring that they receive the respect and the support they deserve.
Of particular note, in terms of some of the key changes that were really well received in this bill, was the, as I said, spousal deduction. That was one that, as has been noted, a number of people have been contacting their local MP for many years around, just the sense that it was quite unfair, so I’m very, very pleased to see that that was addressed in this bill.
This bill will affect around 450 superannuitants in the 2022-23 year, and they will no longer have their entitlement to New Zealand super or the veteran’s pension reduced because of their partner’s overseas pension. I also note some of the changes around the list of places of residence extended to self-contained mobile homes. The bill adds a new regulation-making power to allow regulations to set out qualifying places of residence, which will enable future developments at older people’s housing arrangements to be recognised a lot more flexibly—so that’s a really good change.
I just want to also support this bill to the House. Thank you.
This call is a split call—I call Dr Deborah Russell.
I rise in support of the New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Legislation Amendment Bill. In speaking very briefly, I do just want to pay tribute to the chair of the Social Services and Community Committee, Gareth Hughes, who is leaving this House shortly, but I’m sure he will be proud of having guided this piece of legislation through his select committee with great unanimity, improving the legislation, and getting it to the stage where it seems that the entire House is going to agree on it. So congratulations to Gareth Hughes, and I commend this bill to the House.
It’s a pleasure to rise and speak in favour of the New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Legislation Amendment Bill, and I just want to start out my contribution by talking about how important our senior citizens are in New Zealand.
I keep saying, when I’m out in the hustings and campaigning, that by 2040 two out of every five New Zealanders will be over the age of 60. That is a huge proportion of New Zealanders who will be in this category, and that is why this amendment bill is an important component for our country’s wellbeing.
I don’t want to take too much time, but I do want to talk about the concept of the people that will be affected by this bill, and, as my colleague Agnes Loheni pointed out, there will be directly about 450 superannuitants that will be affected by this, but particularly the people that are affected by this are those that have overseas pension components. I’ve had many complaints in my own electorate of Northcote around the way overseas pensions are deducted in relation to receiving the New Zealand pension as well. So this bill seeks to deal with that, and I think it really modernises the legislation in relation to the way overseas pensions are treated.
So, look, this is an important piece of legislation. I do want to acknowledge the select committee. Gareth Hughes has been a fantastic member and leader of that select committee in this House and certainly will be a member that will be a big loss to this Parliament, but I do commend this bill to the House.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. I want to commend the Minister, Hon Carmel Sepuloni, for bringing this piece of legislation to the House. As she said in her contribution, it is a piece of work that many of us as electorate MPs have had some experience in over the years, where our constituents have come to us with this basic unfairness of the inability to have overseas pensions matched to New Zealand ones, and, in some cases, where couples are receiving significantly less than they would be if they were able to access New Zealand pensions fully. So in that regard, I think it’s a great piece of work. It does address the basic unfairness in the system.
It has been kicking around for a wee while in terms of needing a piece of legislation to correct and to amend this particular issue, and I’m pleased that we now have that. I commend the bill to the House.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. I’m just going to take a very short call tonight because most of it has been said by the people before me, but I do think there are two groups of people who really have earned their way in our society. They are veterans and superannuitants, and I’m just wanting to make special mention of those.
I know there are some really good provisions in this bill. It’s been well-thought-out and it’s supported across the House tonight, and it’s my pleasure to support it. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
I’m delighted to be able to take a brief call to support this important piece of legislation. The reason I’m really delighted is because this Government is really proud of the work that we have done over the last term in Government to be supporting our seniors, and this bill is just a part of that story of progress. We can think of important things that we’ve done such as bringing in the winter energy payment, and then this year, in response to COVID-19, doubling the amount that is received by our seniors and also by people on main benefits to ensure that they’ve got the support that they need to stay warm and healthy through the winter. We can think about the work that’s gone into the SuperGold card, which has been supported by parties on this side of this House over successive Governments, and that’s delivering real benefits as well. Also, the parties on this side of the House are very proud to be parties that have consistently supported a stable regime of superannuation so that our seniors do have security of income in their later years.
This piece of legislation is about making sure that we have a system that is fair and reasonable, and, as other members have spoken about in the course of this debate, we’ve had this particular issue around the deductions from overseas-administered pension schemes from New Zealand superannuation. This piece of legislation won’t go all of the way to meeting some of the concerns that constituents have expressed to members across the House, but it will go some of the way, and I think it will be certainly very welcomed by people in all of our communities.
This is a good piece of legislation. It’s indicative of the work that this Government has undertaken to make progress on behalf of all New Zealanders, and I commend it to the House.
Bill read a third time.
🗣️ Spoke in this debate (14)
- Dan Bidois (New Zealand National Party — Member for Northcote)
- Ruth Dyson (New Zealand Labour Party — Member for Port Hills)
- Gareth Hughes (Green Party of Aotearoa / New Zealand — List Member)
- Barbara Kuriger (New Zealand National Party — Member for Taranaki-King Country)
- Agnes Loheni (New Zealand National Party — List Member)
- Hon Tim Macindoe (New Zealand National Party — Member for Hamilton West)
- Hon Ron Mark (New Zealand First Party — List Member)
- Chris Penk (New Zealand National Party — Member for Helensville)
- Hon Priyanca Radhakrishnan (New Zealand Labour Party — List Member)
- Dr Deborah Russell (New Zealand Labour Party — Member for New Lynn)
- Hon Carmel Sepuloni (New Zealand Labour Party — Member for Kelston)
- Hon Louise Upston (New Zealand National Party — Member for Taupō)
- Hon Poto Williams (New Zealand Labour Party — Member for Christchurch East)
- Hon Michael Wood (New Zealand Labour Party — Member for Mount Roskill)