Parker David: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In Committee 
Parker David: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In Committee 
[Volume:654;Page:3801] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 The speaker who has just resumed her seat tried to reinvent history and say this Government inherited a poor set of books. The reality as the fourth estate knows and as anyone who is informed knows is that the incoming National Government inherited the third-lowest Government debt to GDP ratio in the world. The previous Labour Government had run surpluses which were criticised every year by National which called for higher tax cuts. Labour ran surpluses and we left the Government books in very good order indeed. 
We heard the Minister Paula Bennett refer to the “few poor people who may be listening”. I do not know what that meant but I can tell members that a lot more poorer people will be listening in future years because without the pre-funding of superannuation it is far less likely that superannuation entitlements will be able to be maintained in the future. The National Party appeared to have a road to Damascus experience about 4 years ago when it changed its mind on the issue of advance contributions in order to pre-fund superannuation. We all know that our population is ageing and that as it ages a greater proportion of people than at present will be reliant on Government superannuation. Intergenerational unfairness as well as real Budget pressures will be created if we do not put some money away now to create a fund for superannuation for that larger number of people. 
We also know of course that about 3 or 4 years ago the National Party was so desperate to get back to the Treasury benches that it would tell people anything that it thought they wanted to hear. So National tried to perpetuate the myth that people could have everything they already had plus tax cuts. During the election campaign John Key promised that he would maintain contributions to the Superannuation Fund at the same rate as was the case previously. We already have a broken promise there but why should we be surprised about that? In a former National Government Bill English cut superannuation and the Muldoon National Government introduced the superannuation surtax. The next National Government under Mr Bolger broke promise after promise on superannuation as well. 
Here again we have a broken promise by National on superannuation. I say to Mr Garrett that he should be listening to this because he knows what National promised during the election campaign and that it has now resiled from its promise and is not pre-funding superannuation. Now we hear Paula Bennett say superannuation is locked in and loaded. Locked in and loaded—what does that mean? That is another metaphor that does not mean much. It sounds like the fire-at-will provision for people who are employed under the 90-day legislation. Superannuation in the future will become as insecure as employment is now under that Minister’s Government. 
Superannuation is very important to New Zealand. It is perhaps even more important that we improve our savings in New Zealand. We have a current account deficit and we have poor levels of private saving. What has the National Government done in response to that? It has cut the generosity of KiwiSaver which instead of having a 4 percent savings level plus a 4 percent employer contribution has been cut to 2 percent plus 2 percent. The National Government has cut out the tax credit that was going to pay most of the employers’ cost and it has also cut out much of the tax credit for employees. We now have reduced incentives for saving and that will inhibit the future performance of New Zealand economically. There will be less investment capital available to our economy and lower savings available to people in their retirement and even more important the Government is cutting the contributions to the New Zealand Superannuation Fund in breach of its earlier promise. 
In my opinion this is disgraceful politics. This Government came into power on the promise that it would keep on pre-funding superannuation. That promise was explicitly made time and again. It was an issue of political controversy when National was on the opposite side of the debate so it changed its position in order to get on to the right side of the politics. It reversed its stance only to flip-flop again once it was in Government. National has broken its promise to the electorate. Now Mr English says he cannot pre-fund superannuation because National would have to borrow in order to do so. It borrowed for tax cuts—the tax cuts that were so unfair that an incredible one-third of the cuts was delivered to the top 3 percent of income earners. How can that be fair? Of course the people in that 3 percent are not very worried if they do not have their future superannuation entitlement; they do not really need it as much as most people do. But the majority of New Zealanders will still be reliant on superannuation in years to come. It is disgraceful that this Government is not pre-funding superannuation at this time because it makes it less likely that superannuation will be able to be afforded at current rates in the future. 
Report noted.