Turei Metiria: Appropriation (2011/12 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
Turei Metiria: Appropriation (2011/12 Estimates) Bill — Third Reading Imprest Supply Debate 
[Volume:674;Page:20498] 
METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I am pleased to stand on behalf of the Green Party and address the Government’s economic strategy through the Appropriation (2011/12 Estimates) Bill and the Imprest Supply (Second for 2011/12) Bill. In any economic debate the values of political parties are laid bare. Politics and economics are about the allocation of resources. The decisions that politicians make and the values that are triggered by those decisions determine who will benefit from the country’s economy and who will not. This National Government has made decisions that shift resources from those who need the most and has given them to those who have the most. As a result our economy has become increasingly unfair and unequal. The Government’s tax cuts which went primarily to the top income earners are just one example of this. They were unfair and they were poorly timed. These tax cuts have not been revenue-neutral as Bill English likes to say—at least not in the short term. 
Borrowing to grant tax relief to the wealthy is not a smart way to manage the economy. Equally borrowing to pay for the rebuilding of Christchurch when a majority of New Zealanders are willing to pay a small levy on their income to foot this bill is similarly not a smart way to finance the rebuilding of Christchurch. The Government is also preparing to borrow to help fund its $19 billion expansion of our State highway system over the next 10 years. This is not a good time to be borrowing to build infrastructure that is vulnerable to high oil and carbon prices. The community knows this; the Government does not. Faced with a Budget deficit in part of its own making this Government has chosen to cut services to families and to increase debt. Despite being told that we cannot afford to have services to families we are unnecessarily borrowing to fund tax cuts motorways and the Christchurch rebuild which Kiwis have all said we should share the cost of. 
This is a Government that is not afraid to borrow when it suits it. Treasury are forecasting net core Crown debt to go from $10.5 billion in 2008 to $41.5 billion this year then to $72.9 billion in 2015. These decisions mean that as a country we will run the largest fiscal deficit in our nation’s history. The Green Party has exposed this Government’s economic decision-making as destructive to both our people and our environment and as a result destructive to our economic security as a nation. This Government chooses policies that will impoverish our children degrade our environment and prioritise short-term wealth acquisition over long-term stability. The Green Party makes constructive hopeful and practical choices that will protect our environment protect our economy and protect our kids. 
Let us consider our kids first as 270000 children live in poverty in New Zealand right now. That is one in four. One-quarter of all New Zealand children are growing up in poverty. International research puts the cost of not acting to address child poverty at around 3 percent of GDP per year. In this country that means that about $6 billion every year is lost in health justice education and welfare spending that could be saved if we chose to act early to prevent child poverty. Bringing kids out of poverty does not just make humanitarian sense; it makes economic sense as well. A Unicef report  
Child Poverty in Rich Countries 
—that includes New Zealand—states: “Variation in government policy appears to account for most of the variation in child poverty levels between OECD countries.” More important the report also states that many OECD countries appear to have the potential to reduce child poverty to below 10 percent without—without—a significant increase in Government spending. The economic argument for investing in our kids does not require a huge amount of Government expenditure. It requires better prioritisation of existing Government spending and more compassionate decision-making—economic decisions—that looks beyond the short term and the next election. 
The Green Party’s solutions for bringing 100000 children out of poverty are affordable and practical. One of our solutions is to make Working for Families fairer. Working for Families helps low-income families make ends meet but it does not provide the same help to kids whose parents receive a benefit. We would incorporate the in-work tax credit into the family tax credit and extend it to 140000 of the poorest households in this country. That would give an extra $60 a week to those 140000 families. It would be enough on its own to bring 100000 children out of poverty. This policy would cost around $300 million a year. That is less than 0.3 of GDP. While child poverty is costing us $6 billion a year this solution is just a fraction of that. It costs us more to do nothing than to do something. It is fiscally irresponsible to allow children in this country to continue to grow up in poverty. 
But this Government has priorities other than children. Instead of addressing child poverty National is allocating $1.4 billion in this year’s Budget to subsidise pollution under its emissions trading scheme. Instead of helping our must vulnerable children National is spending money on an unnecessary “Holiday Highway”. For just a fraction of the cost thousands of children could be brought out of poverty. Thousands of children could be provided with the opportunities that National members say those children are entitled to but refuse to support. 
This Government has made life tougher for those on low incomes. High rates of inflation and the increase in GST mean that the lowest incomes have less for the basics. A total of 275000 New Zealanders work for the minimum wage. Many of them take care of dependent children. For every five children living in poverty two are in households that work—for every five two are living in households that work. Finding a job is not a panacea to ending child poverty at least while wages remain so low. It is impossible to make ends meet on the minimum wage so the Green Party would immediately raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour to help working parents provide the basics for their kids. Again that is worth about $60 extra a week for someone working full-time on the minimum wage. Not only will raising the minimum wage help those families who are in work but it will generate up to around $173 million a year for the Government at a time when the fiscal deficit is ballooning. That is smart economics in action: supporting families and children raising children out of poverty and raising money for the Government. What can anyone possibly suggest would be a more important priority than those families and those kids? 
The recent NBR Rich List shows that there has been a 20 percent increase in the combined wealth of the 150 richest New Zealanders. A 20 percent increase in the minimum wage would have seen the minimum wage jump to $15.60. We know that most of those who are employed on the minimum wage work for very large corporate entities that can well afford to pay that little bit extra to enable those families to take better care of their families and their kids. When the National Government chooses to keep the minimum wage low it chooses to keep families in poverty. When the National Government chooses to keep the minimum wage low it chooses to keep children in poverty. The Greens have the courage to look at revenue-raising options which this National Government has failed to consider out of weakness to ensure that we can continue to live within our means in this country. 
Economic and fiscal sustainability is an integral part of the Green vision for a sustainable economy that is fair. We would reprioritise Government spending towards those who need it the most while reducing debt. We would raise a comprehensive tax on capital gains—excluding the family home—that in time would raise some $4.5 billion a year and close the single-biggest remaining tax loophole in our tax system. We would put a fair price on carbon and water dismantling some of the last Government subsidies paid out to polluters and industrial farmers. A clean green economy that works for everyone including our most vulnerable is a better and fairer alternative than this Government’s irresponsible fiscal approach. Thank you.