Lees-Galloway Iain: New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLees-Galloway Iain: New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 30 June 2015. Volume:707;Page:4919. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North):I have found the debate this evening very interesting—quite fascinating—and a lot of it has revolved around the question of whether it would have been appropriate to continue to make contributions to the Superannuation Fund during the period when the Government was borrowing in order to carry out a range of activities actually. I love the way that the National Party tries to sort of reduce this down to borrowing in order to put money into the Superannuation Fund. The Government has borrowed to an astonishing level actually—to levels that no other Government ever has before—but in order to do a range of things.One of the things that the Government borrowed to do was to provide tax cuts. There are really good arguments why you do not provide tax cuts especially tax cuts to the wealthy. There might have been an argument for it during the period of recession and then the very slow period of growth after the global financial crisis. There may have been an argument for tax cuts if the majority of the money returned to the citizens of New Zealand had gone to those with the least because those with the least have to go out and spend that money because they are struggling to make ends meet as it is and that would actually have provided the economic stimulus that was the argument the Government made for providing tax cuts while it was borrowing heavily just in order to keep the ship afloat. But no the Government did what National Governments do. It was true to form and it gave tax cuts to the most wealthy which was wonderful for the people who were most wealthy but did very little to stimulate the economy.During that period of time it may well have been prudent—and in fact looking back it would have been incredibly prudent—to carry on contributing to the Superannuation Fund. But actually the point I want to make is this: it is that achieving surpluses is actually incredibly important for the Government because if you are in surplus you remove that debate. It is actually a really simple decision to make if you are in surplus making a contribution—what the size of the contribution is might be a question for debate but making a contribution to a superannuation fund then is an easy choice to make. I accept that it is a more difficult choice to make when you are having to borrow for a range of things but if you are in surplus it is an easy choice to make and that is why achieving surplus is important. Alistair Scott is nodding away.The Prime Minister is not so sure about whether achieving surplus is quite so important. It was important—it was a very important—The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Order! [Interruption] Order!IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Well it is relevant to this bill because what we are talking about is actually saving for New Zealand’s future—putting contributions into the Superannuation Fund in order to ensure that universal superannuation is actually available for future generations. That is actually one of the great issues facing this nation at the moment and should be facing that Government: how do we make sure that universal superannuation remains available not just today not just in 10 years’ time but in 20 years’ time 30 years’ time 40 years’ time? How do we ensure that it is still available? In the face of an ageing population in the face of a growing number of superannuitants in comparison with the working population in the face of all those challenges what do we have to do to ensure that universal superannuation is still available? That is why the Cullen fund—Todd Barclay: Keep National.IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: No not keep National actually; the exact opposite of keep National because if the National Party had been in Government in 2002 there would be no Cullen fund. There would be no Cullen fund because members opposite are obsessed with hindsight and they have got absolutely no foresight. That is classic National Party thinking: always thinking about the past never thinking about the future. So actually if you want to ensure that New Zealanders in the future will be able to rely on universal superannuation what we need more than ever now is a Labour-led Government a Government that can actually look into the future a Government that actually believes in sovereign wealth funds and believes in putting money aside now to save for the future. That is not what the National Party wanted to do—not what the National Party wanted to do at all. It wanted to blow it all on tax cuts for its mates here and now not worrying about the future.Members opposite have gone quiet now because they know I am right. This is an important piece of legislation because it will help make the Superannuation Fund—