Clark David: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeClark David: Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11419. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North): I stand in support of the Customs and Excise (Tobacco Products—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill as will my Labour colleagues. But the first thing we want to ask the Associate Minister of Health for and what we want him to put on record is a cast-iron guarantee to New Zealanders that this is not just another tax grab. We want to know that the money from this bill—the $425 million over 4 years—will be put into public health. That is what we on this side of the House want to be assured of—that it is not just another convenient way for the National Government to achieve a constructed surplus so that it can hang tax cuts out as a carrot at the next election that it actually cares about this issue and that it wants to achieve this smoke-free target.The Associate Minister has put some words forward around achieving that target. He has talked about the progress made so far and we do want to support the Associate Minister in that. We want to support the progress that has been made and we do support this measure to further reduce smoking which kills so many New Zealanders unnecessarily. But we want a guarantee—a cast-iron guarantee today—that this money will not go into the consolidated account as just another source of revenue. We want to know where this $425 million is going. We want to see it help Kiwis face up to the challenge of smoking. We want to see it support Kiwis in public health and in the areas of smoking obesity diabetes mental health addictions and so forth—those things that would make such a difference over time to New Zealand society.This money must not go into the consolidated account; it must address public health issues and we seek that assurance from the Associate Minister. We will seek in his future speeches in the House a reassurance that that is the case. When it goes into the consolidated account we know that it disappears on pet projects. There will be some what Mr Seymour likes to call “corporate welfare” where money gets dished out to the Government’s favourite causes. It might be charter schools—one of the prime forces in the area of corporate welfare in this country—where the Government’s mates are handed out some extra money to do a job that would otherwise be done in a public system where kids would get educated if we funded them properly. But no the Government funds them at a higher rate because that is one of the pet projects of that member across there because he is in to corporate welfare like no other in this House.He would probably see the money go into the Skycity deal an over-the-top deal of money going out hand-over-fist. He does not even approve of this measure he said in his press release last night but he will be supporting it in the House. There is a member you do not quite know where he stands on most things—well he stands in several places he tells us. But corporate welfare is one thing he seems determined to support. And this is another measure that it appears he is willing to support in order to get the money out that he wants for his mates. He will have also no doubt support for the flag referendum for the Saudi sheep scandal and for various other deals the Government has done that it uses money from the consolidated account for; to fund those kinds of things that are not public health measures. But here we have some more money going into the coffers. It will probably go on similar projects—things that middle New Zealand does not like but that are this Government’s pet projects.So we will seek that assurance from the Associate Minister as this bill goes through the House—that this money really will go towards those causes: addressing smoking addressing obesity addressing diabetes addressing mental health and addictions; those public health issues that would make such a difference to New Zealand’s long-term future. We will seek assurance that it will not be dangled in front of Kiwis later on as a tax-cut bribe from a Government that is more concerned with dishing out money to a very few privileged people at the top and defending the interests of those named in the Panama Papers than the interests of most New Zealanders—most New Zealanders.So Labour will remain concerned too about the overall health picture. This is one part of it. In the Budget we heard that the Government has continued to fund Health at below the rate of inflation and cost increases—$50 million short this year. We already know that it was $1.7 billion—$1.7 billion—short in funding over the last 6 years. That means ordinary Kiwis middle New Zealanders are missing out on surgeries they need; and middle New Zealand is missing out on the health services that we all ought to enjoy regardless of whether we are super-wealthy or not. This is a Government that is seeking to undermine middle New Zealand and here we have an example where it is doing a good thing but we wonder where the money is going—we wonder where the money is going—and we hope that the Associate Minister will be able to assure us that it will actually go into achieving the targets that the Government has set itself.In primary health care in this area $14 million has been funded by the Government over the next 4 years. Here we have an example right? It is taking over $400 million away; it is putting $14 million back into the area we have been told. That is well short of the $20 million to $26 million that General Practice New Zealand said was necessary in order to address Government underfunding associated with inflation in this Budget. The Government is simply not allocating adequate resource in this area. The science is very clear that that would make a huge difference to the overall burden of health cost for our country. It would be the kind of investment that would see middle New Zealand benefit not those very privileged few at the top that this Government seems so intent on supporting these days.An excise tax is the best means of stopping smoking and that is why we will be supporting this bill. But we do need a comprehensive plan to get to a smoke-free Aotearoa by 2025 and the experts say that we are not on track to do that and that should be of concern to every member of this House—every member of this House. Seventeen percent of adults in 2014-15 smoked at least monthly and 15 percent of adults in New Zealand smoked daily in 2014-15. We are not on track to achieve that smoke-free target by 2025. That is what the experts say. Government members no doubt will say something different in their speeches but that is what the experts say and we on this side of the House we like to listen to what the people in their field—the experts—say. We do not think we know better; we actually understand that public health is a genuine issue and needs to be tackled genuinely not just with kind words.We want the assurances as I said at the outset that this money will be invested in anti-smoking programmes obesity programmes and programmes that improve New Zealanders’ overall health. Unfortunately with that cut across the sector of $1.7 billion we know that some of these services have been stopped. In my area mental health funding has been squeezed. We know that all the NGO providers in Dunedin for example have been asked to take a 5 percent cut in the last year—regardless of performance regardless of whether they are doing a good job or not. The NGO providers have all been asked to take a cut. That is what this Government is doing to the health system; it is squeezing it until there is nothing left.What we also know is that smoking rates among Māori in particular are too high at 38 percent and among Pasifika it is at 25 percent. Those are Ministry of Health statistics. Adults living in the most deprived areas in New Zealand are three times as likely to have a smoking addiction as those in the least deprived areas. This affects people across New Zealand’s spectrum. But of course this price hike will not affect those at the very top. They know this; they know that for them it can be a luxury good. But middle New Zealand is the group that will continue to suffer because this Government does not have a real plan to achieve that smoke-free target by 2025.We are still waiting for other measures from this Government—for example to ban non-plain packaging—but this Government just does not seem to have the courage to move forward the bill that it has put before the House on plain packaging. It does not seem really ready to do anything about this issue. It is all window dressing; it is a measure as far as we know to get $425 million into the coffers to construct a surplus that it can use for its corporate welfare bribes to try to get members of Parliament who do not even agree with the bill onside and to try to get them to vote for it because those members know they will get something out at the other end.David Seymour: He ran out of ideas 5 minutes ago—5 minutes ago. He ran out of time.Dr DAVID CLARK: Mr Seymour knows this is true. He will get up and speak shortly. I look forward to his tortured denial on this issue but I also look forward more to the Associate Minister giving us an assurance that this money will genuinely be used for the public health good of New Zealanders. This Government needs to front up to the fact that it is not on track to achieve that goal that it should be achieving of making New Zealand smoke-free by 2025.Of course the cuts that we have seen in this Budget will cost Kiwis’ lives. We know that in the health area. The medical practitioners tell us that. Across the medical sector we know that this Government has made cuts that will cost lives. Pharmac for example got less than the $103 million that was needed. Health needed $635 million in this Budget just to keep up with population and inflation costs. [Interruption] Those members do not like it; they do not like it when the truth is spoken in this House—they do not like it at all. They are uncomfortable with the fact that they have been cutting and squeezing across the public health sector and they cannot give an assurance that this money will actually go to public health and the public good in the long term. I look forward to hearing some kind of response from the Government on this issue.