Chauvel Charles: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Chauvel Charles: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:645;Page:14161] 
1. CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: Has he received any reports suggesting that he abandon his four tests for tax cuts? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 Yes one from Mr John Key who has suggested that the four tests cannot be met and therefore should be abandoned. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister confirm that his four tests are completely irrelevant given that the Prime Minister has announced three times that there will be tax cuts and he announced again today just half an hour ago that there will be tax cuts? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I think the Prime Minister and I have both in a synchronised fashion announced on many occasions that there will be tax cuts. But of course the interesting question for Mr Key is which of the following he thinks tax cuts should achieve: greater inequality reduced social services increased borrowing or increased inflation. Again he looks down as he spent much of yesterday looking down. 
Gordon Copeland 
: Did the Minister’s four tests have anything to do with his reneging in Budget 2007 on the tax cuts through bracket adjustments he had promised in 2005 or was it just—as he said at the time—because New Zealand taxpayers did not express sufficient gratitude to him when he decided in 2005 to reduce their tax burden? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I do not think the phrase “chewing gum tax cuts” came from New Zealand taxpayers at large. I remember where that particular phrase came from. However that had nothing to do with the ongoing programme we will be announcing in the Budget. It will be interesting to see whether the National Party votes for those tax cuts. It has voted against every other tax cut this Government has introduced. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister explain why he has argued for 8 years that no tax cut could meet those tests and why he has suddenly discovered in election year that tax cuts can meet all of them? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The member is wonderful at making up a fact asking a question about it and then sitting down and looking very pleased with himself about it. What I will not do is what that member did—cut taxes and then cut New Zealand superannuation to pay for it. 
Sue Moroney 
: How does the announcement of a programme of personal tax cuts fit with previous decisions around taxation made by this Government? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: That programme will build upon and complement the $4.5 billion a year of tax cuts already introduced for families savers and business. I point out yet again that firstly National voted against every one of those tax cuts; and secondly as far back as I can go in history National has never voted for a cut to the business tax rate—only Labour Governments have done that. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Can the Minister remember when there were “Swiss chocolate” tax cuts without any cuts for public investment in education health and other areas such as in 1998 when there was a $1.1 billion series of tax cuts and who the Treasurer was who did that? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I do recollect some tax cuts in that period and I do recollect Mr Peters having something to do with them. But then I also recollect the National Government turning around and cutting New Zealand superannuation as a consequence.