Ardern Shane: Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Ardern Shane: Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18606] 
SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki-King Country) 
: 
 I rise in opposition to Part 2 of the Customs and Excise (Motor Spirits) Amendment Bill. I do so for this reason. This graph that I have managed to get from the Parliamentary Library shows me that now at this point in time 51 percent of the price of every litre of fuel that people purchase in New Zealand is tax—without the 5c per litre increase being proposed. If we look at the breakdown of where that tax of 51 percent goes this is what we find. The accident compensation levy accounts for 9.4 percent of it the petroleum fuels monitoring levy accounts for 0.1 percent the National Land Transport Management Fund gets 33 percent local authorities petroleum tax makes up 1.2 percent GST makes up 22 percent and petroleum excise tax accounts for 34.3 percent. All of that makes up 51 percent of the total price of a litre of fuel. So the question I have for the Minister is this: if 51 percent of the price of a litre of fuel cannot fix the problem we have with New Zealand roads then how can he suggest to the Parliament today that a further 5c per litre slammed on to poor old “Joe Hard-worker” the Labour voter will fix it? 
It gets worse. If we do a little bit more research we find that in the last decade the combined distance travelled by the motorists of New Zealand has increased from something like 15 million kilometres per year to about 30 million kilometres per year. The question that comes from that—and I would be prepared to let the Minister take a call to explain it to us—is: how much of that extra cost which is put on people in terms of getting to work comes out of the average weekly wage? It is a simple question. How much of an increase has there been in the cost of transport or in the cost of going to work in the last 10 years with that massive increase? The Minister sits there and shakes his head. I am sure he has no idea of the answer to that question. 
I ask this Minister who is part of a Labour Government that has so far introduced 24 new taxes since it has been in power this question: at what point he does he believe that poor old “Joe Hard-worker”—traditionally a Labour voter but no more—has suffered enough at the hands of this Labour Government? I say to the Minister that having 51 percent of the price of petrol as a plethora of taxes is enough and that another 5c will not fix the problem. 
I need to address a further point and it concerns the issue of this Government setting a precedent like none that has ever been set in this Parliament before. It is an absolute abuse of the Westminster system. I could read out a whole list of things that this Government has done but the debate today needs to focus on the fact that the Government is increasing taxation without representation. The Committee is today debating legislation that indexes the price of petrol to the consumer price index. I ask the Minister whether he can show me an example of this having happened before. Where has there been such a blatant increase in taxation? I am thinking about the 24 new taxes that this Government has introduced since it came to power and about this extra 5c. Where in a Parliament anywhere in the world have we seen such a blatant abuse of executive power? I would be very interested to hear the Minister’s answer to that and I am sure that most New Zealanders would. 
It is also interesting to note that throughout the whole of this parliamentary term a number of parties have said that they are against increases in tax. Then we look at what United Future is likely to do today when we get to the final stage of the debate on this bill. Will it support this bill? That is what we want to know. We know the Greens will support it—the Greens follow blindly wherever Labour goes—and we know they will be morris dancing outside later on. But will United Future members support this legislation today? That is a question we need an answer to. I suspect that once again they will roll over and say: “Yes sir no sir—or madam. How many bags full and how high should we jump?”.