GEORGINA BEYER (Labour-Wairarapa): It is a pleasure to take part in this debate on the 2003-04 estimates, and in particular, on housing. Nearly $260 million in extra funding for housing for low-income people and those at risk is contained in the Budget for 2003. The funding, which is over 4 years, consists of nearly $100 million to be spent on providing another 318 State homes, as well as extending 80 houses to better suit larger families. That is on top of the nearly 3,000 more State houses that were already planned.

About $60 million is to accelerate the modernisation programme of State houses, and that is on top of $30.5 million already planned over the next 3 years. That modernisation programme is important for many other reasons, and I highlight the fact that health reasons would be most helpful in the wider scheme of things. This Government is committed to providing quality housing for low-income people in New Zealand, and will work to alleviate some of the conditions that people have found themselves living in as a result of a depleted and rundown State house system, particularly during the 1990s.

We must remember that somewhere in the region of 11,500 State houses, as I recall, were sold off by a previous Government during the 1990s. That caused a great deal of stress in communities such as mine in Wairarapa, where most, if not all, of our State houses no longer exist. However, when this Government came into office in 1999, it made a commitment to return to income-related rents. That has contributed greatly to at least 53,000 low-income New Zealanders in Housing New Zealand houses having the better quality of life that this Government is committed to.

I chair the Social Services Committee that has some responsibility in this area under the aegis of Vote Housing, and the committee was pleased to greet the Minister and other officials who came to speak before it. I also commend the committee for its work on this particular vote.

Given the ability to range on to other subject areas such as social development, which is also under the aegis of the Social Services Committee, I would like to make a few other key points in my contribution to the 2003-04 estimates debate. Unemployment is at its lowest level in 15 years. More people are working now than at any other time in our history. Treasury estimates that declining overall benefit numbers have saved the taxpayer $937 million in projected spending on benefits. That is a considerable amount of money in anyone’s language. Unemployment benefit numbers have dropped by 30 percent since 1999. That is a remarkable figure, and it has been achieved under a Labour-led Government.

Unlike National and ACT, Labour is committed to assisting job seekers into meaningful employment. For example, the 2003-04 Budget increased subsidised childcare and out-of-school care and recreation (OSCAR) assistance from 37 to 50 hours per week to improve support for low-income parents moving into work. That is a very proactive commitment to low-income people who are most desirous—and most people I know are in that situation—of moving into work, but there are certain barriers that get in the way. This particular initiative is gratefully accepted on behalf of those people who will benefit most from it.

A concern was raised during the committee report regarding the rise in sickness and invalids benefits that many OECD countries are experiencing. The primary drivers of that rise in New Zealand are an ageing population, the increase in the superannuation entitlement from 60 to 65, and policy changes resulting in people moving off accident compensation and on to the sickness benefit. Budget 2003-04 provides $400,000 over 2 years. We need to have a better understanding of the reasons behind the growth—the ballooning out, for want of a better term—of sickness and invalids benefits, and this kind of initiative will give us the opportunity to do that.

I now move on to employment, and I have already mentioned some of the good points there. However, the unemployment level is the lowest in 15 years. New Zealand’s unemployment rate of 5 percent is lower than our major trading partners and above the OECD average. That is something this country can be proud of. Indeed, 130,000 jobs have been created since Labour came to office in 1999. There are now more people in work than at any other time in New Zealand’s history. It is encouraging that there is potential out there for employment figures to improve beyond that. The country needs to be prepared—and this Government certainly is—to embrace whatever opportunities there are to get people into employment.

The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich): We have dealt with Vote Employment.

GEORGINA BEYER: Thank you for reminding me, Mr Chairperson, but it never hurts to reiterate the good news—something we never hear enough of in this Chamber.

I return to some of the interesting points that the select committee reported on regarding social development, and point out that invalid benefit numbers have grown from 32,000 in 1992 to 65,000 in 2002. That is quite a remarkable increase. If current trends continue, that number is set to increase to nearly 80,000 in the next 3 years, which is sobering. I see that a member from New Zealand First, Mr Dail Jones, is also astounded by that possibility, so we expect support in our initiatives to try to tackle the problem. On current trends, sickness benefit numbers are also forecast to grow—to 39,000 by 2006.

Gaining a greater understanding of the drivers of that growth will place the Ministry of Social Development in a better position to manage it, which is a sensible and responsible thing to do. The research will assist the ministry to investigate ways to keep people connected to employment opportunities when they have an illness or a disability, and to the communities they live in. The ministry’s research on sickness and invalids benefits is currently being scoped, and while the time frame is not yet finished, it is proposed that the study will have a number of components, with different completion dates over the 2003-05 period. Interim results will be released as different components of the study are completed.

As I conclude my comments on housing and social development—and I reiterated employment, just to get it on the record—I point out that the Minister in charge of this area, the Hon Steve Maharey, and the Budget delivered by the Hon Dr Michael Cullen, are proof positive that this country and this Labour-led Government are committed to tackling the tough and very vexed issues of social development—housing and employment—and getting to the core of them. This Government is working positively to find long-term solutions—not the short-term, slogan-grabbing, work-for-the-dole kinds of initiatives that have been proposed by the Opposition. Its policies exist only in its memory of the last 10 years. Nothing particularly new is coming out of the National Party; it has given us a rehash of the old. Hopefully, as that party sorts itself out, it might begin to see that while it dithers over its policy development in this area, we are actually implementing positivity for low-income people in this country.