Prasad Rajen: Taxation (Annual Rates Returns Filing and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Prasad Rajen: Taxation (Annual Rates Returns Filing and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 18 September 2012. Volume:684;Page:5351. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour) 
: 
 I am sorry to take a call away from my friend Dr Clark who seemed to be on a roll here but I want to address my comments to Part 5 of the Taxation (Annual Rates Returns Filing and Remedial Matters) Bill and in particular to clause 154 just to say that what clause 154(1) and the subsequent subclauses represents essentially is the cynicism of the National Party and the National Government when it comes to savings. Really right from the time when it became Government it has had its nibs into a very successful saving scheme. In a sense it has wanted to do what it has always done to Labour Governments’ savings schemes which is to destroy them— 
Darien Fenton 
: Wreck them. 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: —and wreck them. That is all it is: wreckers when it comes to— 
Colin King 
: Just robbing Peter to pay Paul. 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: Well I say to the member if the member feels so strongly about any provision in this bill then the member might like to take a call. No member of the Government tonight has taken any call on the Committee stage of this bill. What is that about? Are they ashamed of the provisions of this bill? Are they ashamed of the provisions about KiwiSaver here? Is there nothing for them to defend? Or do they think that they can sit here and treat this Committee in the arrogant manner snipe away with the smart little inane comments that they have made all evening but do nothing to debate the substantive provisions of this bill? At least I hope that when I am sitting on that side I will defend what the Government is trying to propose. I say the same to the Minister in the chair the Minister of Defence. None of the members this evening has taken a call to answer any questions. I know the Minister thinks that may never happen but never say never Minister and I think the Minister knows that. 
But coming back to clause 154 here is the big flip-flop. Those members have tried to destroy—I think this was socialism by stealth was it not? 
Darien Fenton 
: No that was Working for Families. 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: Oh there was something else. But they are certainly against it. They did not vote for the KiwiSaver scheme and they have tried to destroy it right from the time they have come into Government. So it is a Labour idea and here they are. They previously destroyed KiwiSaver by reducing it to a half and now they are slowly clawing it back and trying to reinstate it. 
But in the meantime years have been lost in the savings record. The Government is very very quick to talk about the importance of saving and it is very quick to say “Isn’t the country doing well in its savings now?”. Well it is no thanks to the Government. 
John Hayes 
: Oh rubbish! 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: These are the policies put into place by the last Labour Government and that is the benefit that that member’s Government is reaping now. At least the member might be intellectually honest enough to actually say that. He could take a call and say “Ah we’re all about that and that’s why we’re making these changes now.” The Government does not really have a savings plan of its own. It is mucking around with Labour’s savings plan which is working now so the Government has no choice but to slowly increase that—slowly. It has no ideas of its own. 
The cuts to KiwiSaver have been significant. The Government has reduced it and it has retarded the ability of the scheme to contribute significantly to the savings programme of this particular country. These provisions begin to put a little bit back in but the Government has done so much damage to it. So it should explain why it was against the scheme right from the beginning. Why did it reduce it to half and is now increasing it by a quarter again? It knows that it was a great scheme. It knows it was working well. It knows its potential to assist the savings record of families and the future ageing population of New Zealand. This is what is going to save this country. That is no thanks to the members opposite and no thanks to the Government of the day. So perhaps they should apologise. They should just say “Sorry we screwed up. Sorry we made a mistake.” Now is a good time to acknowledge that this was a good idea and that the previous settings were just fine. 
I cannot remember but can anybody on this side of the Chamber remember any scheme that this Government has come up with in the last 4 years that actually increases savings or increases the development of this country? Is there any? There certainly have been none. The Government believes that trickle-down will actually do everything. In fact it will not. But if the members had the courage of those convictions they would take a call and yet they all bow their heads and they all snipe away at the comments from this side of the Chamber because members on this side feel passionately about the tax system and about the savings record of this country. That is why we have taken so many calls and why we are prepared to stay here and debate the points that are being made. But no there is nothing from the other side of the Chamber. There is no acknowledgment. There are snide comments about the chattering classes but no real programme no real defence— 
John Hayes 
: Not snide comments. 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: Well I say to Mr Hayes please take a call. Please explain his Government’s views on this. Please explain to the Committee why these provisions are provisions that National has brought in and why it made the changes in the first place and why now it is increasing it and how long it will be before the settings go back up to 4 percent where the settings were previously. 
John Hayes 
: Oh bear of little brain! 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: The member has no answer. The member has nothing but a cynical approach to a major bill before the Committee. 
John Hayes 
: Everybody except you understands why. 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: Well take a call. Take a call and explain. 
John Hayes 
: I don’t need to. We all understand what we’re doing. 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: There is no law that the Government members have come up with that they should not be able to stand up and defend and defend as often as necessary. But that member takes no opportunity. The member’s colleagues take no opportunities to defend the Government’s particular provisions in this bill. 
John Hayes 
: “We won you lost.” 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: Well that is just so simple. That is so simple and that member forgets. “We won. You lost. Therefore.” What is Mr Hayes saying to the country? That the National Party won so everything now has got to follow its particular recipe even if it is going to fail even if it is unsuccessful? There are these constant shifts that they make with good policy settings and just to give an impression that this is progress fools nobody Mr Hayes—nobody. So let us just have some real debate. If there are some real points the members want to make they should make them but there is nothing. 
What other provisions do in Part 5 is improve that. I think the Finance and Expenditure Committee probably did great work on this particular bill— 
John Hayes 
: It did. 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: That is no thanks to that member. But it did begin to look at provisions around a simple process of stopping contributions once the 5 years is up. I mean here is the select committee doing the work of the design of this bill that Government Ministers etc. should do but no members on the other side of the Chamber have taken a call to defend the provisions. No member on the other side of the Chamber has got up to actually counter argue the points that this side of the Chamber has put before the Committee in this debate—none. 
John Hayes 
: That should tell the member something. No substance to them. 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD 
: We just had another one from the member. It is something—he mumbles away and only the two people sitting beside him could hear. It was not important enough that the Committee needs to hear it or the country needs to hear it. Those members have no defence. There is nothing that they want to say. It is almost as if National has come up with it the select committee has done its work and therefore we should go from there. 
So I think that is contempt. It is contempt of the processes of this House. I may be new to this House. I am only in my second term but I find that quite contemptuous that Government members would not defend the very provisions that National has come up with and the very ideas that it thinks are important particularly when it comes to something as important as KiwiSaver. There is universal agreement that here was a programme that was well designed well-thought-out and set for the long term. But what does the Government do the moment it comes in? What is the first thing it does? It cuts it. That is what it knows: cut slash and burn. It has done it here as well. In the last Parliament that is what it did. Now it is having to retrieve some of that but again there is no apology. I say to Mr Hayes and his colleagues that this is not new. This is what National did to the fourth Labour Government’s scheme—the scheme that the Kirk Government put in. It was a great scheme and if that had been allowed to stay can you imagine where New Zealand would be today? But there is no credit to that side of the Chamber for destroying something that was good in 1975 and destroying something again that was good with the KiwiSaver scheme. So those members should take responsibility—maybe the next member will take a call. Thank you.