Mackey Moana: Taxation (Budget Tax Measures) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Mackey Moana: Taxation (Budget Tax Measures) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:654;Page:4017] 
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
: 
 I am happy to stand to take a call on Part 2 and I thank the Minister in the chair Peter Dunne for taking a call to explain why this measure is happening. It is unusual to have a Minister in the chair who is happy to answer questions from the Opposition. It is quite a breath of fresh air. Long may it continue! 
Labour members believe that this part should have been referred to a select committee. It may well not impact on many people right now but the fact is there are people already in the scheme; there are people who have taken up this option. And there may well be people who want to take it up especially as times get tougher and they are facing saving for their retirement which has become all the more urgent now that superannuation will not be fully funded in the future given that the Budget stops the Government’s contributions to the New Zealand Superannuation Fund. In that respect KiwiSaver becomes even more important as a tool for saving for one’s retirement. It is a shame that KiwiSaver itself was gutted right before Christmas. I had hoped that in this Budget we would see a reversal of that given that we will not be able to afford New Zealand superannuation in the future and given that many of us on this side of the Chamber will pay taxes— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Please speak to Part 2. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: I am talking about Part 2 which is about KiwiSaver. It is a very broad area Mr Chairman. It is very important because a number of people who at this time might be looking to keep up their retirement savings would also have a mortgage. At a select committee we would have been able to tease that out. At a select committee we would have been able to discuss whether the balance is right and what impact it will have. As times get tougher was there likely to be more uptake of this measure? If so and if there were administrative problems with how it was run how could we fix them? Labour members think that this change is significant enough to go to a select committee and it should have. It does not have to be made right now. It does not need to be done today under urgency. Given that New Zealand superannuation is not guaranteed in the future and given that we do not know how it will be paid for it is a fact that— 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Didn’t John Key give a personal guarantee? 
MOANA MACKEY 
: He did give a personal guarantee but it is all very well to say that New Zealand superannuation will be there and then cut the funding for it. He cannot have it both ways. Last time Bill English was the Minister of Finance he cut New Zealand superannuation. This time he has found a sneakier way of doing it coming round the back and saying it will be fine. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: I did preface this debate by saying it is narrow. It is about mortgage diversion. Members can make references to other matters but they cannot base their speeches on KiwiSaver per se. This debate is about mortgage diversion. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: Thank you Mr Chair. I think I was misled by the mention of the word “KiwiSaver” in this part but I will keep my comments to mortgage diversion. However it is not possible to talk about the mortgage diversion part of KiwiSaver without making reference to superannuation and KiwiSaver. I guess I was also responding to interjections about superannuation from the other side of the Chamber. I believe that it is within the Standing Orders for me to do so. I was not responding to those from Mr McClay because I could not understand what he was saying but certainly those from Mr Woodhouse. 
Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman 
: You’re getting personal and nasty. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: Mr Coleman should calm down. I am not getting personal and nasty. Jonathan Coleman accusing me of being personal and nasty is like Jack the Ripper criticising domestic violence as Bill English likes to say. This part of the bill should have been referred to a select committee because a mortgage diversion process— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I am reluctant to do it especially when no Government member does— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Points of order will be heard in silence. Thank you. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I have been here a long time and I think that doing— 
Hon Member 
: Too long! 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Are you going to deal with him or— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: I will hear your point first. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: OK. Comparing a member with Jack the Ripper and his relationship to domestic violence goes beyond a line. Although I do not want the member to apologise I think the remark should be withdrawn. Even I do not think we should go as far as that. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: I did not actually hear the comment; there was too much noise. Has the member to whom it was made taken offence? Because I missed it I am not even sure whom it referred to. If the member did take offence it should be withdrawn. The member could perhaps facilitate things by withdrawing—I do not know.  
Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman 
: I would like to speak to the point of order. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Well I guess I have opened it up by saying that I could not hear it. I will hear only the member. 
Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman 
: The fact is that we have just conferred on this side of the Chamber and no member here to our knowledge made any such comment. Trevor Mallard is being deliberately malicious by inventing comments— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Look when we raise points of order we should not cast aspersions upon the character of individuals. A point of order should refer precisely to the Committee. That is a general warning. I did not hear the comment; the member does not seem to have taken offence. Let us just park it. The second thing is that the Committee seems to be in a particularly fractious mood this morning. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: I wonder why. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Look here I am about to chastise someone on the Government side—do members see what I mean? I am trying to do my best here. Let us just continue. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I want to make it clear to members opposite that I was not suggesting— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Order! 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: No it is important. My colleague made the comment; no member opposite did. I just make it clear that I was not accusing any of the members opposite of making the comment. It was a comment made by my colleague about Jonathan Coleman that I heard— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Enough enough. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: —and thought was offensive. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Stop! Halt! Moana Mackey has about a minute to go on mortgage diversion. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: Thank you Mr Chair. It is really hard to make the jokes work when the National members just do not get them. In any case I thank my colleague— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: They are the jokes. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: —that is right—Trevor Mallard. I am so pleased that he is my moral compass in this Chamber. I have completely lost my train of thought now! 
Part 2 is about mortgage diversion and it should have gone to a select committee. I look forward to a National member taking a call to explain why it could not have gone to a select committee. Those members may say that it is unimportant. Well it might be unimportant for them but it is probably not unimportant for the people already in the scheme and it is probably not unimportant for the people who are looking at their bank balances and at last night’s Budget realising there is nothing in the Budget for them and asking themselves how they are going to save for their retirement which they now have to do as well as make mortgage repayments. The mortgage diversion scheme may well have been an answer for them. But we will never know how many people are in that position because we do not have the opportunity to ask the public what they think. That has become a little bit of a hallmark of this Government.