Cosgrove Clayton: Taxation (Urgent Measures and Annual Rates) Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Cosgrove Clayton: Taxation (Urgent Measures and Annual Rates) Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:651;Page:135] 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
: 
 As I reflect on the debate of the last 24 hours a question comes to mind and it is simply this: in that speech Mr Tremain’s speech Mr Bennett’s speech and all the speeches we have heard from the Government in defence of this bill which increases taxes for the bottom end why have we not heard any rebuttal of the allegations the Opposition has put on front of them? 
When Phil Goff used the example of a family on $50000 with one child and investing in KiwiSaver losing $70 a week—that is seven-zero for Mr Bennett’s benefit—as a result of this package did we hear one denial from Bill English or Mr Tremain or Mr Bennett or that tax expert Mr Foss? Did they deny it? I remember that last night Mr English grinned as if he had been caught like a kid with his hand in the cookie jar. Did any of them get up deny it and say: “No that is not true. The facts are other than what is being put forward by the Opposition.”? No they did not deny it because they cannot deny it. 
Last night we saw the Maori Party members look as if they could have leapt into the desks in front of their seats as they stuck their hands up and gave their party vote in support of this bill. Every one of their constituents earning under $40000 will be getting either zip from this or an increase in tax. A couple on $55000 a year with three kids will have to pay $14 extra a week because in effect they get a tax increase. If Hone Harawira could have shrunk himself and dived into his desk or under it to get away from this debate he would have. Mr Flavell is piling the computer and the boxes higher and higher on his desk because he knows he has to answer his constituents probably in a couple of months when they rock into his office and say: “Mr Flavell we voted for you. Why are we paying more? You never told us about this.” 
Here comes the man himself Bill English. He is the architect of this bill. Not once in any of his contributions in the last 24 hours did he say: “No the Opposition is wrong. As the National Party promised in the campaign everybody will do better out of our tax policy.” That is what National said. They talk about aspiration. I ask Mr Bennett that learned gentleman on the other side of the House how it is aspirational if a family that is on $50000 is in KiwiSaver and has one child loses $70 a week. 
The only National Party response last night was from that genius Nick Smith who when he decided to stop holding his breath said that that is the politics of envy. That is what he said. I have the  
Hansard 
 and I am going to blow it up. I along with Maryan Street and the troops on this side will come to Nelson and find all the families on $50000 a year who are in KiwiSaver who have one child and who lose $70 a week. We will line them up in front of that genius’ electorate office and let him say on behalf of National: “Oh you $50000 parents with one child losing $70 a week—that is the politics of envy.” 
As I said last night to Mr Bennett and Mr Tremain that is the politics of betrayal not envy. Where is the aspiration when dad is on $35000 and mum is on $22000 they have three kids and they have to pay $14 a week extra in tax? Where is the aspiration in that? Or does aspiration and the so-called choosing a brighter future apply only if one is at the top end? We know that Mr Bennett and Mr Foss wherever he is and Mr Mapp—and I now know the anatomical impact of peroxide on the cranium—will get a big tax rebate of around $100 a week. Apparently aspiration applies only to those who are pretty far north of $40000. 
I looked at the  
Dominion Post 
 this morning. It said that those on $42000 a year will get $4.62. Those members criticised us for the so-called block of cheese tax cuts. Well that is one slice of Chesdale without the plastic wrapping. Apparently aspiration and choosing a brighter future applies only to their mates at the top end. I do not think it is the politics of envy to stand up as we are in this House do our duty and point out that this bill was not signalled in its entirety before the election campaign. 
Dr Mapp got up and said: “You don’t need to send this bill to a select committee. You don’t send tax bills to a select committee.” I say to Dr Mapp: “Wake up!” I used to chair the Finance and Expenditure Committee and we did tax bills—we did a lot of them. We can send this bill to a select committee and why? Because it comes into effect in April. That is plenty of time to send it to a select committee for a week or a couple of weeks. But oh no Dr Mapp does not want to do that because then the tax experts and the venerable social services agencies such as the Salvation Army and others would come in and point out the things that we are pointing out today. 
Moana Mackey 
: And the manufacturers. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: And the manufacturers of course. 
My colleague Moana Mackey talked about the research and development tax credit. She made reference to a meeting that happened with Mr English. I know for a fact that manufacturers flew from all around the country to have a meeting with that member in Auckland and they worked him over. They got the blowtorch out and did the rotisserie on him. Do members know what he said to them? He said: “Ah look do not worry we will fix it some other way.” They did not believe him and they do not believe him now. 
The justification for doing away with the research and development tax credit was this which appeared in the  
New Zealand Herald 
: “National leader John Key in announcing the move to drop the scheme yesterday as part of the party’s tax policy said…‘It’s clear that the tax credit has created a lot of business for tax accountants and tax advisers but evidence of real increases in R and D is harder to find.’ ” Hang on; there is a problem with that. That sound business person and good guy the chief executive officer of the Canterbury Manufacturers Association in my area John Walley said that Mr Key’s comment was “daft”. Another member of the House was called daft—the electorate chairman of the National Party for Gisborne called Anne Tolley daft I think. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: No Nick Smith. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Oh Nick Smith. 
So Mr Walley of the Canterbury Manufacturers Association said that Mr Key was daft because the research and development tax credit applied for the first time in the 2008 income tax year. Unless Mr Key is a clairvoyant—and he portrays that he has the powers of a miracle worker—or unless Mr English is a clairvoyant and can see into the future and into the mists of time they cannot predict what will happen. Of course the Aussies do not agree with Mr Key. He said it all has to be a rort but it is a rort that has not happened. So National will get rid of it although it actually has no evidence. That is the truth. 
Then we had the great betrayal of Dr Mapp. As my colleague pointed out $330 million was to be the compensatory factor to go to the Crown research institutes. That is up in the air. That is disappearing really quickly. One would think that members of a new Government would be so proud of their tax policy the benchmark document that they say they campaigned on that they would get up and say: “No the Opposition is wrong. Dr Cullen is wrong Mr Cosgrove is wrong Ms Mackey is wrong. You and all the examples you have used are all wrong.” But that has not happened once. Even the great guru Mr English has not once got up and admitted it. Even the  
Dominion Post 
 worked it out on the front page today. A large number of people in our community will get nothing from this or worse still they will be grossly disadvantaged. 
I again say to the Maori Party members that there is still time for them to get themselves out of the pickle they have got themselves into. There is still time to come down to the House and oppose this bill as there are a lot of votes to go and a lot of water to go under the bridge. I would love the Maori Party to do that. We know that National Party does not care what its constituents think when they rock up and ask why they are paying more when National said during the campaign that people would gain out of this measure. But there is still time before the Maori Party constituents rock up and ask: “Why are you supporting the National Party in this?”. 
On every marae and at every kohanga reo when the parents come to pick up their kids the explanations will have to be given. I do not think the Maori Party members will have their research people write them a word for word speech as they do and then come down to the House and read out an explanation and a justification for supporting the National Party in this. Even the research unit will not be able to come up with that one. The Maori Party members did not campaign on it. They were against it. They should be against it because they represent some of the poorest people in the community who will be hit hard by this. 
I invite one of the geniuses over there to get up and negate what the  
Dominion Post  
has said what Dr Cullen has said and the examples that I Phil Goff and others have given. There are large groups in our community that are disadvantaged. [ 
Interruption 
] Mr Bennett can shake his head but why in that great oratory he gave us did he not say “That is wrong and here is why.” and give us the proof? It is because the member does not have the proof. Well there could be another explanation—it was not in big print. But the member does not have the proof nor does he have the evidence. It is now apparent to us that it is aspirational if one is at the top end. If one is the chief executive officer of Telecom my word that person is brimming with aspiration. It is just pouring out of every pore. But if someone is at the bottom end that person is in trouble.