Robertson Grant: KiwiSaver Budget Measures Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: KiwiSaver Budget Measures Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 21 May 2015. Volume:705;Page:3846. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central):Thank you very much Mr Chair.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I want to hear more from David Clark.GRANT ROBERTSON: Look I agree with Mr Brownlee. We all want to hear more from Dr David Clark. The really good news for Mr Brownlee is he is going to get numerous opportunities to hear from Dr David Clark over the coming hours in this Chamber. I am sure Gerry Brownlee will hang on every single word that comes from Dr David Clark. I want to speak to clause 3 of this bill.Hon Ruth Dyson: That’s good because that’s what we’re debating.GRANT ROBERTSON: That is right. That is my first key performance indicator for the day ticked off: I am on the right clause. The reason I want to take a call on clause 3—Hon Gerry Brownlee: Come clean and tell us you know nothing about it.GRANT ROBERTSON: Oh I see; here we go. Mr Brownlee asked whether I know anything about clause 3. We will read it out slowly for the Leader of the House: “Principal Act amended—This Act amends the KiwiSaver Act 2006.” There are four numbers in a row. You will recognise the 2 then two 0s and a 6. If you put them all together in one that is 2006. That is in clause 3 of the bill. There will be many thousands of New Zealanders hanging off this debate watching it on television and listening to it on the radio who will be asking why it is—Hon Gerry Brownlee: Wondering why you’re wasting time.GRANT ROBERTSON: Ah! Mr Brownlee says he is wondering why we are wasting time. There is only one person in this Chamber who can explain—and that is Gerry Brownlee—why it is that he is overseeing a piece of legislation coming into this Chamber that retrospectively takes away people’s rights. It retrospectively takes away $1000 rips it out of their pockets. Gerry Brownlee can explain that. He is the one wasting the time and money of New Zealanders by having us here in this Chamber. So clause 3—Hon Gerry Brownlee: Will Labour undo this?GRANT ROBERTSON: Oh yeah! Oh yeah! We have been there; we have been there Gerry because we believe in savings. We believe that every New Zealander should actually have a right to savings. Every New Zealander should have the ability to put something away for the future—not just Gerry Brownlee’s rich mates but young people and people from low-income backgrounds. They should all have the opportunity but Gerry Brownlee wants to take that away. He wants to make KiwiSaver only for the people who can walk in on the first day and say: “I can do KiwiSaver off the bat; I know I have got enough money.” It is the people who would not have saved before this incentive came in whom Gerry Brownlee does not want to have in KiwiSaver. [Interruption]Responding to those interjections I want to return to clause 3. There will be people out there watching and listening who are wondering why it is that in each bill—Ron Mark: Oh they’re glued to the television!GRANT ROBERTSON: —they are; they will be glued to this—that comes before the House the principal Act is named in a clause on its own. It does seem a little unusual to have a clause that simply says: “This Act amends the KiwiSaver Act 2006.” The reason that clauses like that are put in legislation is that people will look at an amendment bill like this and ask: “What are they doing? Why on earth are they putting this measure up?”. It refers people back to the KiwiSaver Act 2006 to enable them to understand what it is that is being amended here.You would look at this piece of legislation and you would wonder why on earth someone would introduce legislation to take the incentive away from being part of the scheme. That is what the KiwiSaver Act 2006 is about: “The purpose of this Act is to encourage a long-term savings habit and asset accumulation by individuals who are not”—here is the one for Mr Brownlee—“in a position to enjoy standards of living in retirement similar to those in pre-retirement.” It is very important to have clause 3 in the bill because it refers people back to the actual purpose of KiwiSaver. If they were looking at just this amendment bill they would be confused. They would think: “Well KiwiSaver is a scheme just for people who can afford to get into it. We do not need to have any incentives for people to get into KiwiSaver.”When we were sitting in the Budget lock-up in a sort of airless room downstairs on Thursday we read this and we thought: “This is ridiculous. This is taking away the incentives that are in the KiwiSaver Act 2006.” And then we saw the retrospectivity. Why would you make it retrospective? Why would you do that? You do it because you know that this is a good incentive. It has been made retrospective because if the Government waited before putting this legislation through thousands of people would sign up to KiwiSaver. Is that not the point? Is that not the very point? The reason the Government is doing this retrospectively is that it knows that this is a good incentive that it is actually a useful part of the scheme. The bill amends the KiwiSaver Act 2006 in a way that actually in my opinion undermines the purpose.Paul Foster-Bell: What’s in it for Gene Simmons?GRANT ROBERTSON: Paul Foster-Bell I have to say would probably look better in Gene Simmons’ make up than he does at the moment. He is clearly a long-term fan of glam rock. We on this side of the Chamber can all see that. Actually to be honest I think Paul Foster-Bell is a bit more Gene Pitney than he is Gene Simmons. [Interruption] No Mr Foster-Bell if you want to be Richard Simmons you need to get to the gym a bit more often OK?Hon Member: Oh that’s unnecessary.GRANT ROBERTSON: That is what he just called me by the way. Where were we before I was so rudely interrupted?The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Clause 3.GRANT ROBERTSON: That is right—clause 3 of the bill. That is right. As you Mr Chair indicate by your hand movements clause 3 is a very small clause that is about naming the Act that is being amended here.I think it is very important for all members of the Committee to consider again what the purpose of the KiwiSaver Act 2006 is. When KiwiSaver was brought in National Party members never liked it. They never liked it because it reminded them of an earlier Act that actually created a universal comprehensive compulsory superannuation scheme that their former leader Sir Robert Muldoon came along and pulled apart and that would have been worth $200 billion or maybe $500 billion - odd dollars today. That Act from the 1970s could have been what is being amended today but no today it is the 2006 Act that is being amended.This clause allows us to refer back to the purpose of the KiwiSaver Act. I got halfway through that before I was interrupted. The Act aims to increase individuals’ well-being and financial independence particularly in retirement and to provide retirement benefits. To that end the Act provides for the KiwiSaver scheme to facilitate individuals’ savings principally through the workplace. It is an excellent Act with an excellent purpose being thoroughly undermined by this amendment bill today. It is undermined by taking away the incentive that has made a huge difference to whether or not people sign up to the scheme. Just today—Hon Gerry Brownlee: Why means test it?GRANT ROBERTSON: Why means test it? Gerry Brownlee wants to means test KiwiSaver ladies and gentlemen. That is what he wants to do. There is only one political party that has tried means testing of superannuation and that is the National Party. That was Gerry Brownlee’s party. What did you think of it Mr Brownlee when National went for asset testing? What did you think of that?Hon Gerry Brownlee: I am really interested in what Andrew Little wants to do.GRANT ROBERTSON: What do you know? He does not want to answer—he does not want to answer—because it was his party that went down the path of asset testing. It was his party that wanted means testing for superannuation. I stand proudly for a party that has worked hard to give people security and dignity in retirement by introducing the KiwiSaver Act 2006 by starting the Cullen Superannuation Fund and by keeping superannuation universal. It is members on that side of the Chamber who have got something to answer for when it comes to cutting back—eight cuts to KiwiSaver asset testing on superannuation and Sir Robert Muldoon taking away a fund that would have been compulsory superannuation. That is your legacy Mr Brownlee. That is the legacy you should get up on your feet to try to defend.On this side of the Chamber we are proud of the KiwiSaver Act 2006. We are proud of the fact that we have given New Zealanders the kind of dignity in retirement that you and your cronies would deny them. That is what this bill is about. This bill is about taking away from ordinary working New Zealanders a little bit of an incentive to get into saving—500000 New Zealanders. That is what they are budgeting on—500000 New Zealanders. It is taking away that $1000 from them. That is the record of a party that does not support dignity in retirement for all New Zealanders that never liked the KiwiSaver scheme and that has undermined it from day one of getting into Government. This is just the latest step on that path—amending the KiwiSaver Act 2006 by pulling the rug out from underneath people taking away the very thing that allows those people from low-income backgrounds to get in. Just today I got an email in my in-box when I got back from Auckland to tell me—Paul Foster-Bell: Just the one.GRANT ROBERTSON: I will explain to you later what emails are Paul. I got this email from a constituent saying that they had wanted to join KiwiSaver they were waiting to join KiwiSaver and they had just got a full-time job that would allow them to do this but now it has been ripped away by a Government that simply does not care enough.