Here is a plain language breakdown of the Disability Support Services Bill (Government Bill 312-4)

Dr Huhana Hickey

I have tried to outline the core issues sitting in the bill itself in plain language, I hope this helps those trying to understand the Bill which is written in legalese. This, I hope, helps lay people know this bill and how it will impact on them. I am happy to run a zoom on this when submissions are called for if it will help our communities make submissions.

This bill is about who pays for disability care, who is the employer, and who can take the government to court over care issues.

In a Nutshell-What is the problem this bill solves?

1. A recent court case (Fleming case) decided that some family carers might be considered government employees. This could mean the government has to pay them minimum wage, holiday pay, etc. The government sees this as a huge, unaffordable cost.

2. This bill rolls back that court decision. It says family carers are generally not government employees unless there is a written contract saying so.

3. It stops future lawsuits about this issue for things that happened before the bill was introduced.

4. It makes the rules clearer about how disability support money is spent and who makes the decisions.

Key Changes in Simple Terms

1. The Main Goal of Disability Support

What the bill says - Disability support is a "contribution" to care, not full coverage.

Plain English - The government will help, but it expects families to provide the first level of support. The money is limited, so not every request can be fully funded.

2. Who is the Boss? (Employment)

 What the bill says - The government (Crown) or its contractors (like MSD) are NOT the employer of a carer just because they fund the care. The only way they are the employer is if there is a written agreement that says so.

 Plain English - If you are a family member caring for a disabled relative and the government pays you, you are not a government employee. You do not get minimum wage, holiday pay, or other employee benefits from the government. Your employment relationship is only with the disabled person you care for (unless you have a specific written contract saying otherwise).

3. What happens to the Fleming case winners?

What the bill says - The two people who won their cases (Ms. Fleming and Mr. Humphreys) can keep their wins. But everyone else is barred from making similar claims.

Plain English - The door is shut for anyone else to sue for being a government employee carer.

4. Stopping Lawsuits (Litigation Bar)

What the bill says - It cancels any not-yet-resolved court cases about carers being employees. It also blocks new cases about:

  · Employment status of paid family carers.

  · Discrimination claims related to family carers.

Plain English - If you were trying to sue the government over this, your case is thrown out (unless you are the two winners). You can't start a new lawsuit either. The government is protecting itself from more court costs.

5. New Rules for the Future (Ministerial Programmes)

What the bill says - The Minister can create "programmes" (new rules) to decide who gets what support. These must be published and can be reviewed by Parliament.

Plain English - The government wants flexibility to change support policies quickly without passing a whole new law. They will use these "programmes" to set payment rules, eligibility, etc.

6. Family Responsibility

 What the bill says - Families have responsibility "in the first instance" for their members' wellbeing.

 Plain English - Before the government steps in, they expect the family, whānau, or community to help as much as they can. The government's support comes after that.

7. Temporary Fixes (3-Year Transition Period)

What the bill says - For 3 years:

  · Existing employment agreements with disabled people who lacked capacity are made valid (so care isn't disrupted).

  · The Minimum Wage Act cannot force payment for hours the government didn't fund.

  · The government will work on a new payment model for family carers.

Plain English - For the next three years, things stay as they are while the government figures out a new system. No one can use minimum wage laws to get more money than the government already provides.

Who Does This Bill Affect?

Disabled people using funded carers You remain the employer if you hire a carer. But your existing care funding continues.

Paid family carers You are not a government employee. You cannot sue for back wages or employee benefits.

Unpaid family carers the government expects you to be the first line of support.

Government (Crown) & MSD They are protected from lawsuits and cannot be forced to be your employer.

Other carers (not family) Similar rules apply – not government employees without a written contract.

Important Things This Bill Does NOT Do (Yet)

The bill says this is "phase one." A future phase will deal with the safeguards for disabled people, how to collect information and an appeals and complaints processes.

Plain English Summary of Key Sections

Section Plain English

Clause 7 Disability support is just a contribution to help you live your life, using limited public money.

Clause 8 Families must help first before asking the government.

Clauses 13 & 14 The government is NOT the employer of carers unless they sign a written contract.

Clause 15 The government is not a "controlling third party" over your employment.

Schedule 1, Clauses 10-12 Most existing and potential lawsuits about carers being employees are cancelled or blocked.

Schedule 1, Clause 5 For 3 years, you cannot use the Minimum Wage Act to get paid for hours the government didn't approve.

Schedule 1, Clause 16 The two winners of the Fleming case keep their awards. Everyone else is out of luck.

The Bottom Line

This bill says the government will help pay for disability care, but families are expected to be the first to help. It makes clear that paid family carers are NOT government employees and cannot sue for employee rights or benefits (except for two people who already won their cases). The government is stopping all related lawsuits to save money and avoid future court risks. Existing care funding continues for now, but new rules will be developed over the next three years.