Dyson Ruth: Supplementary Estimates — Imprest Supply Debate 
Dyson Ruth: Supplementary Estimates — Imprest Supply Debate 
[Volume:655;Page:4517] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
: 
 I am pleased to be able to take a call on this Appropriation (2008/09 Supplementary Estimates) Bill which Labour opposes. The Budget was a wasted opportunity and the Minister of Finance should be ashamed of his inability to deliver on quite fundamental issues to New Zealanders. He had 9 years in Opposition to prepare a plan to prepare some action and to galvanise support around this Parliament for a Budget that would deliver real opportunity for people but he wasted that opportunity. 
The Budget did nothing at all either to protect or to create jobs for New Zealanders. The biggest opportunity that can be given to New Zealanders is the chance for them to walk out of the door in the morning and go to a paid job but the Minister of Finance has made that chance harder for New Zealanders rather than easier. The Budget fails totally to invest in people our country’s biggest asset. It ignores the opportunity to develop our innovation our skills and our training. During a recession we should be investing in skills investing in people and doing everything we can to give them more security and more opportunity in the future because we will move out of recession into growth again. We could have had a better skilled able workforce ready to take up the chances that improved growth will offer to New Zealanders in future. But that was entirely squandered. There was no investment in the skills and innovation of New Zealanders and not a single thing done to give more security and protection in existing jobs let alone to create additional jobs. 
The Budget repealed under urgency the tax cuts that National bribed its way into Government with prior to the election. This Parliament put those tax cuts through under urgency prior to Christmas and we repealed them under urgency. I have not heard of one single New Zealander who believed Bill English when he said: “We thought tax cuts were affordable but then we found out they were not.” In fact that is not quite correct. I have heard of one such person but he is a member of the National caucus and that does not really count. He fell for that line but he is the single New Zealander who believes the excuse that Bill English and John Key gave to the country. They promised tax cuts when they knew they were unaffordable they rammed them through this House under urgency when they knew they could not be delivered and they repealed them under urgency. 
What opportunity did the ordinary New Zealander have to contribute to that debate? What opportunity have the people earning less than $40000 a year who did not gain 1c from National’s 1 April tax cuts—those ordinary hard-working New Zealanders—had to have any input at all into “now you see it now you don’t” tax cuts? None at all. That is because we know that one-third of the $800 million worth of tax cuts that National did keep in place went to the top 3 percent of income earners in New Zealand. One-third of the total tax cut package went to the top 3 percent of income earners. Are those the people who every week find it hard to pay their electricity bills or their food bills? Are those the people who cannot afford anything at all extra in their houses? Are the people in this Parliament struggling on their incomes? I do not think so. But I know that many of my constituents who work just as hard if not harder than members of this Parliament and do not earn a fraction of the money that we earn in this Parliament got nothing from the tax cuts. They got nothing at all from the National Government’s tax cuts. 
I say that is a disgrace but it is not nearly as bad as the dangling of hope that the Job Summit gave to New Zealanders. People were really hopeful about the commitment to get all the key stakeholders except anyone who voted for Labour or the Greens in a room together get them focused on the fact that we have increasing unemployment in New Zealand and we want to tackle that issue and then drive an action plan led by the Prime Minister. People were really hopeful about the opportunity that the Job Summit gave New Zealanders and now we know that not only were people like the leader of the Labour Party and our employment spokesperson excluded solely because they were Labour but also that we clearly should not have an opportunity to contribute about jobs despite Labour delivering the best employment record in New Zealand’s history during our term in Government. 
But what happened after the Job Summit? Well nothing happened after the Job Summit. The 9-day fortnight? It affected fewer than 350 jobs. For every single job that has been saved that is good. But we are talking about the New Zealand economy where 1000 people each week are losing their jobs. Every week 1000 New Zealanders lose their jobs so 325 people in total is not even half a week’s worth of unemployment under the National Government’s regime. 
People expected something to come out of the Job Summit. Then we thought there is the national cycleway. That was John Key’s idea right at the end of the summit. It did not arise in the workshops nor in his introductory comments nor in any conversation with people who might talk about it think about it and contribute to this idea. Right at the end John Key came up with this idea of having a national cycleway. But Bill English who holds the purse strings said that we would not be having a national cycleway—not this week not this month not next year not ever—under his stewardship. Those were the words that Bill English used in support of his leader and the cycleway. But in the Budget we saw the money for that. 
The money that was taken out of adult and community education and out of scholarships such as scholarships for medical students—genuine investment in skills training for New Zealanders—went into a cycleway that is now being described as a little ride around some regions of New Zealand. I think New Zealanders have already been taken for a ride. They were misled and bribed by National which said before the election: “You can have everything that Labour put in place. We won’t touch any of that and we will give you tax cuts as well.” That was the mantra. That was the Crosby/Textor mantra that went around the country from the National Party: “We will leave everything in place from Labour and by the way you can have tax cuts as well.” People bought that. Now the only part of the cycleway that has been delivered is the ride that New Zealanders know they have been taken on. They were misled in order to bribe National’s way into Government. New Zealanders are rightfully resentful of that. They feel as if their trust has been broken. In my view it certainly was broken. 
We had no investment in skills we had no investment in jobs and the worst trick of all was the one played on superannuitants—not the superannuitants of today but of the future. If the member who resumed her seat immediately prior to my speaking thinks that current superannuitants do not care about the future of the superannuation needs of their sons daughters and grandchildren she is wrong. I am very proud to have been to more Grey Power meetings than any member in this House. Grey Power members are not interested in their own personal well-being as a priority. They care much more about the future security for their children and for their grandchildren. They know that without the investment in the Cullen fund which has been taken away—not just for this year but for a decade—in order to fund the future superannuation needs of New Zealanders when there will be more people over 65 and fewer people under 65 paying taxes to enable us to afford superannuation either the age of entitlement will increase or the rate will go down or it will be a combination of both. We will not have that investment which was developed specifically to partly fund the future needs of superannuation in New Zealand and that is the worst trickery of all.