Social Security (Accommodation Supplement) Amendment Bill

I move, That the Social Security (Accommodation Supplement) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.

First, I would like to thank the parties in this House for agreeing to consider this bill under urgency in accordance with Standing Order 57.

As I’ve mentioned, this bill seeks to align legislation with longstanding policy and practice as it relates to the accommodation supplement for those with partners in care. The bill will amend the Social Security Act 2018 and the Social Security Regulations 2018 to account for situations when one partner is in long-term residential care and the other partner remains in the community. In these situations, the current practice is to treat the individual in the community as single, recognising that their partner in care is unable to contribute to their accommodation costs. The community partner, instead, is solely responsible for covering the rent, board, or costs associated with owning a home.

This practice, however, is inconsistent with existing legislation. I do want to mention that this happens from time to time with complex legislation, certainly not just on our watch. There are many examples of this occurring when the policy intent is not captured in its entirety in the legislation. We have a whole alignment programme with the Ministry of Social Development to continue to look for any issues like this, and I know that with other pieces of complex legislation it is often something that arises.

The Ministry of Social Development became aware of the issue following a 2018-19 review of a decision, at which time the current practice was deemed to be inconsistent with the Social Security Act 2018. Work was started on how to address this. However, during the time that that work was under way, we were hit with a pandemic, which was COVID. Our focus was to ensure we were responding at that time to the COVID pandemic and its impact, including through supports like the wage subsidy and care in the community for those self-isolating. So that is the reason why this particular piece of work was parked. I think everyone in this House would agree that the Ministry of Social Development had quite a load that they needed to work on urgently with regards to the pandemic, and things like the wage subsidy were very time-consuming and meant that there were certain things that were put to the side. I acknowledge that this has been raised by Opposition members, but I do want to clarify why it was pushed to the side at that time.

We do remain committed to fixing our legislation where it requires fixing to ensure that those with partners in care in this particular instance do not lose support for their housing costs. If we don’t amend this issue, an estimated 260 recipients would experience a reduction to their accommodation supplement by as much as $62 per week, or more than $3,200 per year. This bill will amend the Social Security Act 2018 to ensure that these New Zealanders can lawfully receive the single rate to the accommodation supplement when their partner is in care.

Many of these recipients are older people receiving New Zealand superannuation or a veteran’s pension, and they, as such, are likely on fixed incomes. This bill also includes consequential amendments to the New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Act 2001 and the Veterans’ Support Act 2014. It confirms that a community partner would not be subject to abatement of the accommodation supplement in respect of any income that was included as part of their partner in care’s financial means assessment. The inclusion of this amendment will maintain current practice, and thus ensure no change to the accommodation supplement that individuals currently receive.

Should this bill pass, it will come into effect immediately and no later than 1 December of this year, so recipients can continue to receive their benefits at the current rate. We want to ensure that the accommodation supplement continues to help eligible couples and individuals to pay for their rent, board, and cost of owning a home. I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you. In taking this second reading call—usually a second reading comes back to the House after there’s been scrutiny at select committee after the first reading. So all the more reason to emphasise the importance that, although this is coming in under urgency, the New Zealand public and those most affected by this have been denied and deprived the opportunity to express their concerns associated with this.

I identify that this is a complex and highly specialised area of law, and the Acts that are being referred to in the amendment—which this bill is addressing before the House—the Social Security Act, to be amended, 2018: of eight parts, 459 sections, and 12 schedules; also the New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Act 2001: four parts, 89 sections, seven schedules; and finally, the Social Security Regulations 2018: 295 regulations, eight parts. That just emphasises and highlights the high complexity and the importance of detail in getting matters correct.

So the Minister has confirmed, has acknowledged, and has stated that this law was introduced in 2018, that there was a review that happened back in 2018. Why has it taken four years for this to now come before the House under urgency to remedy—to rectify—policy and practice where it is a concern that there has been a non-adherence to what the law requires of our Crown agents in the application of this law?

But the National Party identifies and recognises the importance of the policy intent, the goodwill, looking after our pensioners, and that many of us in the House may well be affected by family members who are pensioners and are in care—and would be the beneficiaries, recipients, of this accommodation benefit. On the second reading, I commend it to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s great to see the support across the House for this bill, the Social Security (Accommodation Supplement) Amendment Bill, because I think anybody that lives alone knows the extra costs that they can incur, compared to somebody that’s able to share that with somebody else in terms of their rent, in terms of the power, and in terms of the internet and the phone. And so what this bill does is it makes sure that those who are living in the community and whose partners are in full-time residential care are able to receive the accommodation supplement at a rate that reflects those additional living costs. While it only impacts a small number of people, I think it’s really important that they can continue to receive the support that they need that is tailored to their circumstances. So I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. As has been canvassed with this bill, its aim is to achieve or provide no doubt that people whose partners are in long-term residential care can have the full entitlements of the accommodation supplement, as others have said. Of course, everybody here seems to be in agreement that we don’t want anyone unnecessarily struggling, and that is a good consensus to start off with.

In saying that, I guess, in further reflections, and particularly when responding a bit to the Minister for Social Development and Employment’s comments in her speech, I do want to acknowledge that, during the pandemic, there were several challenges we had to respond to, which meant certain work had to be prioritised. Ultimately, though, as has also been said by the Minister, the accommodation supplement and the income support laws that allow this to be delivered to our communities are deeply complex. That is part of the problem in the welfare support system—that we have created a system that is so complex that individuals receiving income support often are unaware of what their actual entitlements are. Sometimes, even workers at the front lines may struggle to understand how much someone would get. And it’s not so much their fault; it’s the policy design.

So I just wanted to respond to those comments, because, ultimately, in terms of what we choose to prioritise and the systems that we choose to create, it is a matter of political will. We have successive Governments who have chosen to create complex income support systems. So what I’m hoping, as an outcome of this bill and a sort of broad recognition that the income support system is complex, is that we’re all committed to simplifying it so that people have certainty of what they’re able to receive.

Also picking up from the Minister’s comments: yes, the pandemic started in 2020, but the rewritten Social Security Act came into effect in 2018. So I guess there are some still pending questions about at what point there were issues raised about the fact that there was doubt about whether the approach was consistent with the law. And I guess while I hear that there were other things prioritised, I know that this isn’t the first time we have urgency to try and fix gaps in legislation. So I am interested to better understand how that journey has come about for us to be in the House until this point debating this bill. Kia ora.

Thank you Mr Speaker. Usually, we’re standing up now and we’ve come back from a select committee process and we’ve heard from the public and we’ve heard from the people concerned around the issues and we’d be having a discussion about that.

But I’m really interested, as well, in the comments made that this was discovered in a review over the 2018 and 2019 review. I understand that COVID has caused a lot of issues, and there’s no doubt about that, and it has turned people’s lives upside down and it has made processes here a lot more difficult. But when are we going to stop blaming COVID for not actioning things that are important? Surely, unlawful practice within a ministry is an important issue to fix. I’m just wondering—we’ve had many times this year where there has been an opportunity to fix this and we haven’t. I’m still uncertain as to why that is. I’m grateful it’s being fixed now. I’m grateful that 260 people are not going to suffer having a reduction of $62 a week coming into their house. I’m grateful that the vulnerable people who are relying on this will have the certainty that their life is not going to get more difficult with a reduction and that people going into the future will know what they’re entitled to and the help they can get when they end up in a situation where their partner is having to go into long-term care in regards to health or dementia or any other issue, and that is just one less thing for them to worry about. So we will support this bill through to the committee stage.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Social Security (Accommodation Supplement) Amendment Bill.

In Committee

Parts 1 and 2, Schedules 1 and 2, and clauses 1 and 2