Tabuteau FletcherFLETCHER TABUTEAU (Deputy Leader—NZ First): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. It's a pleasure to rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak to this the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2018-19 Modernising Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill.I'm glad I get to follow Mr Bayly because what Mr Bayly has done for me is highlight some of the inconsistencies in the National Party's positioning on tax. For example Mr Bayly spoke to the House about fiscal creep"—or fiscal drag just in case we made the mistake of thinking he was talking about himself. What the member opposite forgot to mention was that for years lobbyists and people would come to National and ask them to address this very issue but year after year after year they refused to act to do anything about it. Now the accusations fly that this Government is doing the same. Well Mr Bayly let me put that into context for you.You speak of our refusal to shift or decrease the annual tax rates. Let's analyse that from the perspective of a small- or even a large-business owner Mr Bayly. What that member has to realise is that what was happening under the previous Government was that those employees were struggling to get to work. They were literally spending over a month per annum in traffic to get to work every day in Auckland and those members opposite refused to address the issue. They couldn't because they didn't have the revenue. They didn't have the money to do anything about it. What that meant for business was that there were huge losses of productivity especially for our businesses in Auckland—huge losses of productivity. It was affecting the bottom line.What about the education of our employees? The member decried the leaving alone of tax cuts but what that has meant is that this coalition Government is able to invest so much more significantly into our education system so that those people working in our businesses contributing to the bottom line of our businesses are making those businesses better off. They are more productive by definition Mr Bayly.I've spoken about transport but what about housing? What does it do to a business' bottom line when their workforce isn't sure where they are living from day to day from week to week or when our employees are moving across the country trying to find a place to live? What does that do to the bottom line of a business trying to find people to work for them? It makes it next to impossible to find and hold on to good employees. So actually what we're trying to do here on this side of the House—never mind all the social issues and the cost to the individual and the cost to families—is make sure that New Zealanders are in a position to contribute in a positive way to New Zealand business and you don't do that right now by cutting our tax rate.I just want to finish on the health of the employees of our businesses. What does it do for a business if the health system is not looking after a business' employees? What does that do to the business' bottom line when people are taking sick days because they can't afford to go to the doctor they can't even access our hospital system? That is bad for business. That is fundamentally bad for business.What I'd like to do now is be a bit more positive and actually acknowledge the Opposition now and acknowledge that yes this legislation originated with the Opposition and the Inland Revenue Department's desire to modernise their operations. So what we have here is that Inland Revenue went to the National Party and said "Actually we think that our operations are quickly becoming outdated. People's access to our services is becoming antiquated as modern technology progresses." So good on the Government of the time—National; they said "Well what do you need?" And here it is: the solution put to National around the modernisation of the Inland Revenue Department and actually the tax system itself. It was and continues to be a huge undertaking by the Inland Revenue Department. I myself in Opposition had concerns about the sums of money involved but those concerns have been addressed because the Inland Revenue Department has been able to mark their progress in a positive way over recent times. There is confidence going forward because the Inland Revenue Department forecasts are being backed up by the very numbers that they have given this House.This has been a logical undertaking. It is a move into the modern world. It's almost ironic that I use those terms because basically email has become a lot more accessible and more of a tool for people to interact with the Inland Revenue Department and vice versa. This is legislation that enables this modernisation this transformation process. And as has been spoken to on both sides of the House the main gains from this are around compliance issues and the cost of subsequent compliance and the timeliness of Inland Revenue to respond to those broader issues. So what this legislation does is enable these changes so that compliance is not so arduous on the individual or the business. We have more timely transference of information and if I get time I'll give examples of where the tax department itself will be proactive in supplying individuals with their tax obligations rather than the individual stressing and worrying about their tax obligations.What I did want to touch on—and I hope this is where my notes start—is that through this bill individuals automatically will be given the right code in terms of secondary tax. Let me try to explain. It's been difficult for individuals to have multiple jobs and to ensure that they comply with their tax obligations. They're often found wanting at the end of the tax year in terms of their tax bill. So what this legislation does is actually be proactive in the reporting of an individual's tax obligations such that a person working multiple jobs will have their wages and tax forecast out for an annual period. In doing that there won't be a need for a secondary tax code. They will know what their tax obligations are at that time and going forward and they will be taxed at the correct rate. For me as the New Zealand First spokesperson for revenue in the previous parliamentary term that was actually quite a frequent interaction with hard-working Kiwis who were confused by the system and were frustrated by the system.So for me this is quite a timely moment. I'm proud to be part of a Government that sees where good things need to happen. That means the arduous nature of secondary tax codes will be dealt with and those people who are obliged to work multiple jobs—and there are many of them still—will find this whole interaction with the Inland Revenue Department so much easier hopefully. I personally think that the removal of this obligation will be huge for families.Look that's just one of many examples of what this piece of legislation achieves. I'm grateful to be able to support this bill through the processes of the House. Madam Deputy Speaker thank you very much."