Woolerton R Doug: Taxation (Personal Tax Cuts Annual Rates and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Woolerton R Doug: Taxation (Personal Tax Cuts Annual Rates and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:647;Page:16339] 
R DOUG WOOLERTON (NZ First) 
: 
 I was looking forward to the delivery of the Budget and more than that I was looking forward to the debate afterwards. I thought we would see something that has become a bit of a tradition in this House and it is something that we subscribe to. We said what we would like to see in the Budget. We put out our wish list and I thought it would be interesting to see the alternative Budget from the National Party. I honestly and truly believed that would happen because that is what has traditionally happened in this House in an election year. The Opposition has come forward and to its best endeavours put out an alternative Budget. If we had had that then we would have had a truly interesting and meaningful debate that would have filled the whole of this Friday. But we have not had that from the National Party and I think it is sad. 
However I am pleased and New Zealand First is pleased to see that National has at last backed a tax bill that has been put forward by the Labour Government. That is a first in 9 years and I think it is great. I hope those members keep on doing that because New Zealand First has said on the record many times that we will support tax cuts from whomever proposes them—and we have done so. 
Obviously we have said we would have liked to see some incentive for our exporters. Everybody knows that following the problems in America and around the world things are in a bit of a slow-down mode. We believe that the people who can get us out of that situation are exporters who in this country are mainly farmers. We believe we should have seen incentives provided through the taxation system to assist them to get up and help us. We would have liked to see that and we said so. We would have liked to see the first $5200 of taxpayers’ salaries be tax-free and we will be pursuing that in future years. We put those things forward hoping that we would be able to compare proposals from the various parties but we have not been able to do that. We also said we would have liked to see and we will be pursuing this also a reduction in the rate of GST to 10 percent—2.5 percent being taken off. We think that would be fair would not be costly and would not be administratively difficult. We would have liked to see that. 
However we have seen some things that we are very happy with. We have seen the relativity of superannuation for our seniors retained. We have had promises that it will be increased and that is fantastic. We have also seen and we applaud this because it is our initiative an undertaking be given that if the price of electricity goes up because of the emissions trading scheme—and we will see whether that gets through in the fullness of time—there will be some support for those people who find themselves in difficulty. We think that is the way we should go throughout this economy. Nobody should be disadvantaged and the producers the people who go out and get our markets and earn our money should be looked after. 
We have not heard about any of that from the National Party either. That is tragic because what we needed to know today and last night from the National Party is how much it would give in tax cuts to the earner on the average weekly wage. If this Budget is as bad as the National Party says it is—and almost every one of its speakers on this issue has said the tax cuts are too little too late—then I ask how much it would give. Is it not fair that the public should be able to assess a group of people who put themselves up as Her Majesty’s main Opposition—that is what those members say they are—and who say they are looking forward to an election? I ask why they are afraid to tell us the extent of their tax cuts. 
Hon Member 
: Timing. 
R DOUG WOOLERTON 
: I will tell members what timing is. Timing is political. 
All through this debate I have heard National members raving on about Labour’s tax cuts being political. They say the cuts are about expediency. But now the National members say they will not tell the public about National’s plan. They will not be upfront with the public and they will not be honest with the public and allow them to compare National’s tax cuts with those of the Labour Government. This is the day to do it so that it is a fair comparison. While people are looking at this Budget it is traditional that they also look at the alternative Budget of the Opposition compare the two documents and make a decision. Sadly they have not been able to do that. I am told by way of an interjection that it is because of political timing. Political expediency is what that is. We understand that but National has been railing against it and I think that is double-talk. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Your time’s up mate! 
R DOUG WOOLERTON 
: My time is not up yet; I have a few more minutes to speak. Sadly I think it shows a lack of moral fortitude on the part of Her Majesty’s Opposition to be dodging those issues at this point. 
I have said what New Zealand First would have liked to see in this Budget. New Zealand First gives notice that we will pursue those things in future years and that we will do so unashamedly and with vigour. 
We are also pleased to see that the Labour Government at least has come on board when it comes to what we call strategic assets. Those are mainly assets that the Americans describe as utilities—things that people in our society cannot avoid using such as electricity companies transport companies etc. We believe that instead of hocking those things off to private enterprise—in many cases to overseas private enterprise—we should manage them within this country and reap the rewards of good management in that instance. 
Therefore we are pleased to see in this Budget the purchase of Toll’s rail and ferry operations which was announced before the Budget but allowed for in the Budget. We understand that there will be a further infrastructural cost in order to maintain and further develop the rail structure in New Zealand and we do not have a problem with that. We would have had a big problem if we were just giving subsidies to the tune of $100 million per year rising to a foreign-owned company that was managing our rail network. Even then there was some talk that Toll would have needed assistance to redo the rolling stock. New Zealand First would have had problems with that and we would have been talking about that from the rooftops. We are more than happy for those things to be pursued in future years under the ownership of New Zealanders. 
To all of those who compare the purchase of Toll’s rail operations with the old days of New Zealand Rail we say they should look at Air New Zealand. The Government of New Zealand had to put $800 million into it. Air New Zealand is now a shining example of success. It has slimmed down has a sensible business strategy and is thriving in a very very difficult economy. We in New Zealand First look forward to the rail operation becoming of a similar nature to that and returning benefits to New Zealanders.