Brown Peter: Taxation (Base Maintenance  and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill Privacy Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third Readings 
Brown Peter: Taxation (Base Maintenance  and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill Privacy Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third Readings 
[Volume:626;Page:21469] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 That was an interesting contribution from Richard Prebble. I am not sure whether I could decipher what was true and what was a figment of his imagination. I take it that the 38000 new bureaucrats is a reasonably accurate figure. I think that illustrates the concerns New Zealand First has with this Labour-led Government propped up by the “Poodle Party” of United Future. 
I want to take this opportunity to again make New Zealand First’s position clear when it comes to tax. We support a fresh look at— 
Dr Richard Worth 
: Do you support National? 
PETER BROWN 
: I will come to National in very short order. I think that when I get to it the member will be hanging his head in shame. 
New Zealand First would like to see taxation eased for New Zealanders but we do recognise that most law-abiding New Zealanders want greater resources given to the police. That will cost money. Most New Zealanders so they tell us want students to have a universal living allowance and we support that. Most New Zealanders— 
Dr Richard Worth 
: Very expensive. 
PETER BROWN 
: It is an expensive exercise. The member is clearly thinking. Most New Zealanders with the exception of members of the Green Party want more investment into roading—far more than that Government is doing at the moment. Most New Zealanders by a significant majority want an improved health system. We have an ageing population and New Zealanders want and need greater financial investment in that sector. I take issue with the Hon Richard Prebble who said that if we put more money into the health system it would not improve. That is far from the truth. Other countries have invested in the health system to a greater degree in proportion to GDP. This Government puts about 6.1 percent of GDP into our health system but that is too low. We believe that it should be increased on a gradual basis to something like 9.5 or 10 percent including the investment from the private health sector which is in the vicinity of about 1.9 percent. 
We would like to see incentives for new exporters. We believe that we have to add to our export base by encouraging exporters to get involved and a tax incentive would go a long way to achieving that. 
 In this volatile world we believe we have to put more investment into our defence forces. We have to put more investment into our railway and more I suggest into our shipping—not by direct investment but by way of creating a favourable tax regime for encouraging our ship owners and ship operators to get more involved in the industry. Currently there is not one single ship running overseas and that for an island nation tucked down at the bottom of the world is a disgrace. 
Labour spoke about rather than introduced its new tax thresholds—it did not introduce anything in this Budget in terms of thresholds. I think it created more enemies than it made friends. I met a number of people who were prior to Budget day absolutely devoted Labourites—that is the only way I can explain them—and they felt insulted to know that they will wait for 3 years until 2008 when they will get the grand total of 67c a week extra even though the Minister of Finance will pay each and every one of us in Parliament something in excess of $10 extra per week. 
I want to touch on the banking industry for a moment. I take up what Gordon Copeland said because I agreed with him when he said that all we want in this country is for banks to pay their fair share of tax. We want nothing more and nothing less. Currently as I understand it a court action is being taken because it is deemed that they are paying a good deal less. 
Nobody in New Zealand First has said anything about not wanting banks to make a profit. We would like them to be owned by New Zealanders or by New Zealand companies. They are not and we see that as a sad fact of life. We want them to make a profit and we want them to pay their fair share of tax. I make that quite clear. 
New Zealand First believes in tax cuts. This legislation does not deliver on that but it changes the structure in a way that is encouraging and for that reason New Zealand First supports it. We see tax cuts as something at the end of the line after we have delivered on the social good. We believe that the Government’s Working for Families package is a tax cut. It is a targeted tax cut for the low or relatively low paid. It might well spread higher up the chain but basically it is a targeted tax cut for the low paid. New Zealand First supported the legislation when it went through the House just after last year’s Budget and we are pleased with the feedback we are hearing on how it has been delivered thus far. 
One of the urgent things we believe should be done is to put more money into roading. I am pleased that the National Party has taken our suggestion on board of diverting the petrol tax into the roading account. There was a time when that party was totally opposed to it. We started a process in 1998 of diverting 2.1c per litre of petrol into the roading account which if my memory serves me correctly was about $70 million. Had that continued every year with no growth in petrol sales and fuel consumption remaining about the same—in other words 2.1c equalling the same value—at this point in time there would have been something like $2.7 billion put into roading. 
The National Party when New Zealand First and National had a parting of the ways which is putting it politely stopped all that although that is not so according to Don Brash. He blamed Labour in his speech to the Automobile Association convention. He said Labour came in and stopped it. It actually stopped in the 1999 Budget which was delivered by Bill Birch. At the same time behind the scenes in 1998 when we implemented it Bill Birch was telling Winston Peters in particular but it was well known to the rest of us in the New Zealand First caucus that he would not have a bar of transferring that money across. “Over his dead body” I think was the term. So it was definitely a New Zealand First initiative. 
I ask the National Party now it has taken the idea on board and indeed is promoting it how many lives have been lost because that money has not been injected into roading. How much better off would the country be economically and socially if that money had been diverted across as New Zealand First advocated? I know that this legislation has nothing to do with roading or petrol tax or anything like that. But since this Government has come into power it has upped the price of petrol on at least two possibly three occasions by way of taxation increases. All of them to our mind have been unnecessary and they have all been an additional cost to the average New Zealander which was totally unwarranted. 
New Zealand First supports this legislation but we believe that taxation in this country has to be looked at freshly and reviewed positively. We believe in essence that tax should be fair reasonable and encouraging. This legislation is a move in that direction.