Latest news with #SocialSecurity(MandatoryReviews)AmendmentBill
Scoop
5 days ago
- Business
- Scoop
Fixing Double Dips For Boarder And Rent Payments
Hon Louise Upston Minister for Social Development and Employment Legislation fixing the inconsistent treatment of boarder and rental payments has been passed into law in Parliament today. The Social Assistance Legislation (Accommodation Supplement and Income-related Rent) Amendment Bill and the supporting legislation of the Social Security (Mandatory Reviews) Amendment Bill has addressed the inconsistent treatment of board and rent payments around housing subsidies. 'This has been an unnecessarily complicated and confusing system,' says Minister for Social Development and Employment Louise Upston. 'This legislative change means that from March 2026, payments from boarders and renters will be treated equally when considering housing assistance. 'These common-sense changes were signalled in Budget 2024. The changes don't take effect until March 2026, meaning recipients will have time to provide information about any boarders they have.' Currently, if people have only one or two boarders, board payments aren't included when MSD calculates housing subsidies -- unless it's their main source of income. This can result in the Government subsidising the same accommodation costs more than once. In contrast, rent payments received are included when calculating a person's eligibility for housing subsidies. 'This change supports our Government's aim of ensuring our public services are fiscally sustainable and effective. 'We believe that those who have a genuine need should be able to get the help they require while ensuring consistency across MSD payments,' Louise Upston says. Passed this morning, the Social Security (Mandatory Reviews) Amendment Bill introduces mandatory reviews of some specified benefits. These reviews will require MSD to check in and confirm a client's eligibility and rate of benefit at least once a year. Clients must confirm if they are receiving any contributions from boarders, as well as any other circumstances which may impact their eligibility and rate of benefit, like their income. Some aspects of the mandatory reviews will use Automated Decision-Making so MSD staff can focus on supporting people in to work. Notes From 2 March 2026, payments from all boarders will be included when MSD: Calculates how much a person can get for housing subsidies (e.g. Accommodation Supplement or Temporary Additional Support), and Calculates the Income Related Rent (IRR) for a social housing tenant in a social housing property Additionally, if the total board and rent a person receives exceeds their total accommodation costs (or market rent for social housing tenants), the excess amount will be considered as income for other MSD assistance. The housing subsidies that will be impacted from 2 March 2026 are:
Otago Daily Times
30-05-2025
- Politics
- Otago Daily Times
In it for the long haul
If you like Parliament you well and truly had a treat last week, as the House sat until midnight Saturday under urgency to consider the wide range of legislation the government wanted to progress. Some of the matters considered under extended hours were entirely reasonable — every government needs to push through Budget-relevant law changes as soon as possible. Some matters, not so much . . . worthy though the Judicature (Timeliness) Legislation Amendment Bill may be, did it really need to go through the House at 11pm on Saturday? Much earlier in the day the House considered the Social Security (Mandatory Reviews) Amendment Bill, legislation which, arguably, could also have waited for another day. The Bill introduces an annual review of what beneficiaries receive to make sure everything is above board, and partially automates the process. If nothing else, the advent of the Bill revitalised an opposition bench which had every reason to be jaded as the House entered its third day of urgency. Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori all believe this law change is "beneficiary bashing" and were happy to keep on roaring so, despite spirited remonstrations from National Southland MP Joseph Mooney — who had quite the row, as well as a possible lunch date, with Labour's Willie Jackson — to the contrary. "It introduces a requirement that the Ministry of Social Development must review a client's eligibility and rate of a specified benefit at least once every 52 weeks. That is to make sure that they are getting the right amount of assistance that they are entitled to," Mr Mooney said. "It's a very simple Bill. It's quite amazing to hear the lack of quality of contributions from the Opposition. This also introduces a little bit of automated decision making, and, honestly, if that's the quality of debate we get from the Opposition, maybe there should be some more automated decision-making from the other side of the House as well." Mr Mooney was back for more during the second reading debate, accusing the Greens Ricardo Menendez March of rambling and uttering "a complete load of nonsense". "This government is going to bring in structured literacy, which will hopefully help people like the Opposition actually get some reading comprehension and actually read the Bills and understand what they're about, because they don't," he said, before going on to accuse the members opposite of being Luddites. That did not sit well with the next speaker, Labour Dunedin MP Rachel Brooking, who found Mr Mooney's speech to be "curious". "The member will be very happy to know that I spent considerable time reading this Bill . . . If it is simply about reviews, why is it here in Budget urgency? Might that be because the regulatory impact statement (RIS), on page 12, says that the cost of the IT for this will be $5.339 million and the FTE costs associated with that is $7.559m. "Is it also because in that RIS it talks about the expected $238.302m in benefits or related expenses savings over five years? This is about money." For good measure the eagle-eyed Ms Brooking went on to explore the depths of section 363 of the Bill, which she said introduced the sanctions regime. Of course, this was something which government MPs could have been denying had been created had they been making any more substantive contribution to the debate than simply saying: "I commend this Bill to the House," and sitting straight back down again when their time came to speak. That was not it from the South though, as Taieri Labour MP Ingrid Leary wanted to explore "a really problematic piece of lawmaking." "It just seems crazy that 332,000 reviews would be done each year, and the RIS says very openly, on page 12, that would cost — it adds up to about $13 million, and there's no way they could make this happen with the current staff and that's why they need the technology," Ms Leary said. "Instead, they are looking at bringing in this very dodgy technology which is dehumanising and which doesn't have appeal rights." Rather like being stuck in the House on a Saturday rather than being at home in one's own house. I can see for miles and miles Of the many National MPs who made videos or social media posts complaining at media coverage of what Finance Minister Nicola Willis wore on Budget day, no-one beat the effort from Waitaki National MP Miles Anderson. Mr Anderson proudly showed off a tie which his daughter had bought him, which was festooned with pictures of the wearer's head. He mentioned it in the House later too, saying that the Bill he was voting for, like his tie, was splendid.
