Street Maryan: Budget Debate 
Street Maryan: Budget Debate 
[Volume:639;Page:9641] 
MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 I am pleased to take a call in the Budget debate. This is the biggest Budget ever in terms of a structural impact on our economy. It is the biggest Budget in terms of business tax cuts. The business tax cuts package is the biggest we have seen in 19 years. The investment in research and development funding is a huge breakthrough that makes a real difference for the business community and one can hear them saying so. 
I also mention rail infrastructure and public transport. That announcement will have big flow-on impacts for Auckland in particular and also across the economy. It will have social impacts and it will impact on environmental sustainability. In the economy it will mean that businesses can move their goods more freely across a roading network that is not clogged with private cars. We are told constantly—and it does not take a rocket scientist to work it out—that congestion costs the economy. In social terms the reduction of emissions from private cars will make New Zealand a healthier place. People will not be dislocated out in the suburbs if they have an efficient North Shore busway which is effectively the equivalent of a rail corridor or if they have electric trains getting them to work around Auckland. The environmental impact of reduced emissions and carbon neutrality will be felt for years to come. 
This is a long-term visionary Budget. It delivers on the vision of Norman Kirk’s superannuation scheme and it also delivers on Sir Dove-Myer Robinson’s rapid rail scheme. On the last day I spoke about the Budget I wanted to draw attention to the fact that the first Labour Government was known for the institution of the welfare State—in other words for developing a system of care for the poor and the needy. The Norman Kirk Labour Government was known for independent foreign policy amongst other things but it was also known for its superannuation policy. The fourth Labour Government was known for bold economic restructuring with all its ups and downs but it was also known for the bold move of making us nuclear-free which has become one of this country’s iconic identifying marks. This Budget is of similar import. It is the same thing. Every time bold far-sighted moves are made in a Budget—such as those made in this Budget—people’s economic literacy ratchets up a notch. 
The last time I spoke in the debate Judith Collins found my expression “social debate” difficult to understand. I apologise if she was confused by the complexity of my language. I will translate the expression for her. Social debate means what people are saying. If we listen to what people are saying it is clear that when it comes to KiwiSaver people get it. They understand that our savings record in this country is abysmal. They understand that if there is some encouragement a nudge or a kickstart into a savings habit they will be better off in their retirement. They can work out that even those on very low incomes can get into KiwiSaver because the 4 percent is taken out at the start up front at source. With 4 percent taken out it is possible for people to save that money instead of spending it on something. There will always be essential items for money to be spent on but if the 4 percent is taken out at source at the beginning that is the best option for low-paid people because it is a percentage figure and as people’s pay increases as it will do under a Labour Government so will their savings increase. 
This is the most significant contribution to a savings regime that we have seen in this country. People can work it out. They understand that if greater savings are kept onshore within New Zealand there will be greater investment for businesses in New Zealand. 
I tell members opposite that they should not ever pretend that poor people do not save. Poor people are the ones who are not given credit to purchase things. They are not given credit and therefore they save up before they can buy things. Members opposite have only one mantra and that is why they are in such despair about this. Their one mantra is tax cuts. They are bereft of ideas and that is the thing that drives them crazy about this Budget. They have no answer no alternative and no bold suggestions that will take this country forward and allow New Zealanders to prepare adequately. 
I do not hear any interjections of any substance from Opposition members because they are completely lacking in alternative ideas for an alternative Budget. What happened to the old days when alternative Budgets used to be put up? They have not been put up by this Opposition because it does not have more than one idea—that is personal tax cuts. By the time National members have borrowed money to fund tax cuts if they are not going to take it out of public spending they will have brought this country back to the brink of bankruptcy from which this Labour-led Government has delivered us. 
This Government is looking after the long-term interests of the people of New Zealand and people recognise that. People are not short-sighted. If we listen to some of the other conversations that people have—and Mrs Collins asked about social debate or in other words what people are saying—and if we listen to what business people are saying we see that it is clear from the first poll of business decision makers about last week’s Budget that the majority support moves to require employers to match staff contributions to KiwiSaver. They also support the new 10c a litre regional fuel tax. They do not favour immediate personal tax cuts because they recognise that that is inflationary. 
Members opposite are so poverty-stricken in their ideas that they cannot deliver an alternative. They cannot even deliver an adequate coherent reply to the logic and the imperatives behind this Budget. The poverty-stricken nature of Opposition members is an appalling indictment on the state of democracy in New Zealand. We should have a robust debate but we get no such thing. We get carping about one cliché one idea—that is personal tax cuts. People in the street say they would rather have $20 going into their savings account than $10 in the hand now in a measly across-the-board tax cut. 
Members opposite need to sharpen up their performance because they have offered no alternative in the face of what they deep down recognise as being solid constructive moves for the economy of New Zealand for business productivity and for New Zealanders to have comfort and dignity in retirement. That is what we are on about and this is another significant and bold move by the Labour-led Government. The population in this country recognises that we get bold constructive far-sighted moves only from a Labour-led Government. That is the long and the short of it. 
No significant contributions have come from the other side of the House. They have offered nothing by way of an alternative. The poverty-stricken nature of Opposition members becomes apparent as every day passes. The National Opposition is clearly absent from the debate. With only one song to sing National is not even getting the support of the majority of business decision-makers whom one would think would be its natural constituency. But that is no longer the case.