Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill – Committee Stage – Part 4 – Video 5

Social Security Legislation Rewrite Bill – Committee Stage – Part 4 – Video 5

Articles, Blog , , 0 Comments


I cool some Nakano change over hey hey thank you very much look two things need to be very quickly noted to the minister who’s just resumed her chair and thank you for her response to Simeon Brown mr. Brown was referring to Clause 203 which sits within part four I think it’s it’s incorrect to be suggesting that his discussion about the general rule benefit not payable while a beneficiary absent from New Zealanders out of scope is correct nor is it out of part secondly as my contribution will indicate there’s more to part four in terms of changes than simply the two that the minister has pointed out and I’ll be tabling a number of SOP so they no other colleagues are at the moment around this so I want to spend a little bit of time if I might in part four of course cause 1/9 to just to help the Minister there at 1 9 2 in Perak for before part 203 which is also in part 4 this is to do with the beneficiary resident in institution for treatment of alcoholism or drug addiction so it’s not the AAA which is referred to earlier by Christopher pink but what is important is that the changes be made and I suppose it’s wanting to seek some clarity from the minister which may take the time over the dinner breakers they have removed in the SOP reference to the alcoholism and drug addiction Act of 1966 and also reference to the mental health compulsory X assessment so I have two crossed out assessment and treatment Act of 1992 and to replace it which i think is well-meaning excuse me with the substance addiction compulsory assessment and treatment Act of 2017 I think the intention of the minister is obviously to to apply what is seen as a more updated act in this space but I am wondering as the former chair of the Health Committee who stewarded the substance addiction compulsory assessment and treatment then bill through the house that there may be at least two misunderstandings at play that would require some some alteration so I have an SOP tabled at the moment which is suggesting we go back to the original wording that is that we have Clause 192 referencing the alcoholism and drug addiction Act of 1966 and the mental health compulsory assessment and treatment Act of 1992 it’s possible that a further SOP might be needed in order to make sure we can bring in the substance addiction compulsory sessemann Treatment Act of 2017 but I say there are there are two important factors which need to be addressed one is timing of the substance addiction Act of 2017 and the second is is under fuller understanding I apologize to the member the time is come for me to leave the chair for the dinner break their committee will resume at 7:30 to you I’ll be there [Music]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *