Parker David: Westpac New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
Parker David: Westpac New Zealand Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:672;Page:18813] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 The voting on the preamble bemuses me completely in respect of the Maori Party. Maori Party members have not taken one call in the debate and they did not participate in the select committee process to any meaningful degree. It seems that the members of the committee were unanimous in reporting back in favour of the Westpac New Zealand Bill. Rahui Katene the person who cast the vote on behalf of the Maori Party was according to the commentary I am reading on the Finance and Expenditure Committee and she did not express any concern about the bill according to the select committee report. But that is a case in point of how the Maori Party runs business in this House. On all of the big votes it props up the National Government despite the fact that National— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Order! 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: —is undermining the interests— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Clauses 3 to 5. 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: Mr Chairperson I had not finished my sentence. On all the big votes it supports the Government—on motions of confidence—and then when we get down to a tintack bill like this one and like Part 2 of this bill the Maori Party stands up and thumps its chest as if it is independent and represents the interests of Maoridom. What a farce—what a farce. 
I am looking at Part 1 which deals with the purposes of this bill and I cannot see anything from the Maori Party criticising it. So I look forward to seeing whether we have a contribution from the Maori Party as to what its principled objection is to Part 1 which causes it to vote against parts of the bill. Was it just a mistake by the member? If it was the member is free to take a call and seek the leave of the Committee for the Maori Party to re-record its vote. But I suspect it will not because it is all about posturing; it is not about principle in respect of that party. The reality that those members cannot escape is that a vote for the Maori Party is a vote for National. We will be reminding electors of that. 
The purposes of this bill include the vesting of certain assets and liabilities. The assets and liabilities include a wide range of assets which Stuart Nash has previously referred to. The question I ask in respect of the preamble which the member in the chair has not answered is whether those assets will be transferred across at an inflated price and whether that leads to the future tax revenue from the banking sector through those assets being realised at a lower price and therefore causing a loss to the bank which the bank can claim as a loss for tax purposes against future income. Was that risk considered at the select committee? 
The committee’s report as I have said is very brief and runs to only two pages. It just parrots the provisions in the bill rather than critically providing advice on that particular point. I would have thought that the member in the chair who is in charge of the bill and is asking Parliament to pass legislation that may impact on future tax revenues for the Government had information on that point to share with the Committee. I ask the member where it is in Part 1. I might have the wrong part and he might say that the issue is dealt with in another part. In any event I want the member to respond as to how we guard against these assets being transferred across at an excessive price to cause a future write-down which creates a taxable loss for the bank and therefore reduces its tax liabilities in New Zealand. 
I am also interested in whether the select committee received any submission from the Australian revenue authorities about whether these assets were being transferred across from Australia to New Zealand at higher values than they are shown at on the Australian books. That might be tax effective for Westpac but it might not be fair on the Australian Government. I just want to see what is happening in respect of tax issues. I am somewhat suspicious here because we have had a pattern of conduct of the banks minimising their tax liabilities to the tune of many hundreds of billions of dollars. They were forced to pay them only following court action in New Zealand courts which found that the banks had been improperly paying lower amounts of tax.