Parker David; McKelvie IanSecond ReadingHon DAVID PARKER (Minister of Revenue): I move That the Taxation (Cost of Living Payments) Bill be now read a second time. I'm going to start with a quote from Audrey Young on Budget 2020: Robertson's $1 billion cost of living package including a $350 payment for those earning under $70000 to address immediate inflation pressures is a good one and well-designed politically. It is hard to see how the National Party could oppose it (although it will) when cost of living pressures consumes its political agenda these days. Labour's Budget measure of payments is targeted it gives the lower-paid more than National's"—[Multiple interjections] Sorry I'll say that again for the member: "Labour's Budget measure of payments is targeted it gives the lower-paid more than National's tax-indexation plan and it is temporary … The Budget cements Robertson's credentials as careful economic manager for good times and bad the Goldilocks manager: not too much not too little."It's so hard when you're a member of the National Party born to rule but languishing on Opposition benches completely irrelevant not even able to implement their flawed economic plans. They're left with jingoistic messages and misrepresentation of both the current state of the economy and their own history over the years. You know the National Party seems to always forget that average growth rates under Labour administrations compared with under National administrations—Labour does better. This is not just the short-term average; this is an average that goes back to World War II. Since World War II growth rates are better under Labour administrations than they are under National administrations.The tone of gloom from those depressing if irrelevant speeches from the National Party in the first reading—it ignores the fact that we've just had two triple A credit ratings from the top credit rating agencies in the world. Did you hear the National Party make any reference to that? No no. Unemployment rate—did you hear them celebrating historically low unemployment rates of 3.2 percent per annum? No—3.2 percent unemployment rate historically low in New Zealand and the National Party cannot acknowledge or celebrate it. They talk about Government debt—Government debt—Hon Paul Goldsmith: What's this got to do with the bill?Hon DAVID PARKER: What's this got to do with the bill? Well it's got as much to do with the bill Mr Goldsmith as it had in your contributions from your side when you rattled on about Government debt which in New Zealand is half the rate of Government debt as a percentage of the economy in Australia a quarter of that of the United Kingdom and a fifth of that of the United States. Then they said—and this is to quote one of the last speakers for the National Party—"spending like there's no tomorrow" "addicted to spending" "a horrific scale of expenditure". This sort of exaggerated rhetoric from the National Party falls on deaf ears amongst the public because they know it's not right. I thought I'd drag out the record of the National Party under Bill English and their expenditure as a percentage of GDP compared with the expenditure of this Government in this Budget as a percentage of GDP. This Budget projects expenditure of 31.6 percent of GDP. How does that compare with the National Party's expenditure? Quietness from the other side. Perhaps they've forgotten. I'm quite happy to remind them: 2009-2010 32.3 percent. They'll say "Oh well that's just after the Labour Party left office." OK fair enough. What happened the next year? It went up: 34.1 percent of GDP compared with this year 31.6 percent of GDP.I see the Speaker wants me to come back to the bill. I will do—I will do. This bill promises 2.1 million New Zealanders a payment of $350 each spread over three months. This will help New Zealanders facing cost of living pressure. It is very very good. It's equivalent to $27 per week over that period and it's much more than the National Party's alternatives that they have been speaking of. The legislation is necessary because at the moment the revenue department has not got the ability to use information that it holds for tax return purposes like bank account numbers for the purposes of this payment of $350. We want to get this payment out to people as soon as we can and in order to do that we've got to give the revenue department the powers that they need to do it. There are a number of technical amendments that are made through this legislation which I have no doubt that we will have a discussion about in more detail in the committee of the whole House stage. Far from spending like drunken sailors as has been alleged we have a very balanced Budget here although it's primarily focused on expenditure in the health sector. There is cost of living support here—a package that totals $1 billion the largest part of which is $800 million which relates to this $350 per person paid to over 2.1 million New Zealanders. I find it absolutely astounding that the National Party after all of their rhetoric about being on the side of the pressed middle is opposing this legislation—Todd Muller: Squeezed middle.Hon DAVID PARKER: The squeezed middle—the squeezed middle. And they are squeezed by inflation. We agree with that. The Budget projections show that in out years wage growth again exceeds inflation. Of course in the Labour Party we don't have a problem with people getting wage increases which the National Party seems to squeeze when they're in Government and have very low rates of wage growth. So I commend this bill to the House in the second reading and look forward to the committee stageASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ian McKelvie): Members the time has come for me to leave the Chair for the dinner break. The House will resume at 7 p.m.Sitting suspended from 6.02 p.m. to 7 p.m."