New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill

on behalf of the Associate Minister of Health: I move, That the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill be now read a second time.

I want to thank everybody who made a submission on the bill, including those who spoke at the Health Committee via Zoom. I also want to thank members of the Health Committee for their thorough consideration of the bill. The committee unanimously recommended that the bill progresses with only one amendment, which was to change the date the Act comes into force from 1 September 2020 to 30 September 2020.

The bill will repeal Part 4A of the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Act 2000 in its entirety. It will also make consequential amendments to the definition of “employer” in section 5 of the Care and Support Workers (Pay Equity) Settlement Act 2017, by removing the reference to a family care policy, as defined in section 70B of the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Act 2000. Since 2013, funded family care has allowed payment of people to care for family members assessed as having high or very high support needs related to disability and long-term chronic health conditions, mental health and addiction, and aged care needs. The bill is one of a suite of changes to funded family care.

The main intent of the bill is to remove the discriminatory elements of the current legislation that have attracted national and international criticism since it was introduced. Change to funded family care is also a priority in the health and disability sector work programme, and two important nationwide plans: the Disability Action Plan and the Mahi Aroha - Carers’ Strategy Action Plan.

I acknowledge the frustration of the sector and the length of time it has taken for the bill, especially when the original bill was introduced and passed in one parliamentary sitting day. While the bill is very simple, it is a powerful and just response. Part 4A had become a symbol of the frustration felt by many people, including both those needing care and support and those providing it. It’s important that all of those people had the opportunity to have their views on the bill heard. The repeal of Part 4A is, of course, just one of a suite of changes to the payment of family carers called for by the sector. There was widespread support for the removal of the restriction on taking claims of unlawful discrimination that relate to family care policies to the court or to the Human Rights Review Tribunal. Many submitters commented on how unfair the restriction was, and how relieved they were to see it being removed.

Positive policy changes have been made. These changes remove the majority of the issues that moved people to take legal action in the first place. I note that many submitters also took the opportunity to raise wider policy and process issues that are outside the scope of the bill but related to the payment of family carers. These included the needs assessment process, the allocation of hours, safeguarding and advocacy, consultation on any further changes to paying family carers, and the need for better recognition and support of the caring role. These issues will continue to be addressed.

The Health Committee unanimously recommended the change of date, as I just mentioned. The reason for that change to 30 September meant that it will align with the intended completion of the transition of current Disability Support Services family funded care recipients. Disabled people now have a choice of two new ways to pay family members. This is through individualised funding or a home and community support services provider.

Finally, the repeal of Part 4A, coming into force on 30 September, will signal the end of all statutory policy, operational, and payment components of the current funded family care framework, but not the payment of family carers, which will continue under the new arrangements. Part 4A has, for too long, discriminated against the fundamental right for people to be involved in the decisions that affect them, and the right to complain about policies related to those decisions. Today we are one step closer to fixing that injustice, and I commend the bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. A pleasure to make a short contribution on this the second reading of the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill. As has been relayed by the Minister in his contribution, the crux of Part 4A is that it prohibits payments in most circumstances for people who provide that support for their loved family members, and it also prevents certain complaints from being made to the Human Rights Commission and certain proceedings being taken to the courts. So, in essence, repealing Part 4A removes inconsistencies with human rights laws and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

We in National stand to support this bill at the second reading, and I just want to thank and acknowledge the many people that made submissions on this bill and I would also like to acknowledge the Health Committee. I would just like to note some of the key issues that were raised in the submissions. There was some dissatisfaction noted in submissions around accessing disability support, in terms of the process that applicants must need to go through in terms of the assessment process with the Ministry of Health. A number of submitters told the committee that the process is lengthy and complicated, some saying there are a number of hoops to get through, but also some having no knowledge of the fact that such a fund existed. There were also a number of submissions in terms of the remuneration for family-funded care, and the main concern raised was how the needs assessment and services coordination organisation determines the level of support a person will need, in particular around making a judgment of how care is based, in terms of how long it would take to do a particular task in providing that care and support to their loved ones. This is a difficult position for family members to be in and there are increasing pressures on those families in terms of completing those tasks. So submitters did feel that the assessment relied too heavily on calculating the hours worked and trying to quantify how long it takes to perform a particular task in caring for their loved ones.

There were also some concerns raised by submitters in terms of health and safety concerns. The reality is that caring for people with high support needs relating to disabilities, chronic health conditions, mental health and addictions, and aged care—these are very high-risk jobs and, again, it is about supporting those family members who are doing the best they can, being very dedicated to their loved ones, their family at home.

We support this bill at second reading, but we are disappointed that people with disabilities were overlooked in last year’s Budget. However, I commend this bill to the House.

Bill read a second time.