Parker DavidHon DAVID PARKER (Minister of Revenue): Thank you Mr Chairman for the opportunity to take the first call from the chair.Now listening to the last two contributions you'd think that New Zealand's an overtaxed country that we've somehow got swingeing rates of taxation and that the overall wedge of taxation as a percentage of the economy is high by the standards of countries with which we compare ourselves. There are 38 countries in the OECD. New Zealand in 2020 was 24th of those 38 countries in the OECD for taxation as a percentage of GDP. Not 24th highest but—yes 24th highest. Of the 38 countries we're the 14th or 15th lowest as a percentage of GDP that goes to taxation—24th. I suspect when those statistics come out in the next few years looking at other countries we'll look even better compared with other countries because of course since COVID hit New Zealand's actually overall had GDP growth compared with the European countries United States and the likes.Where do we sit on that table? Our tax as a percentage of GDP in New Zealand is lower than the UK and slightly higher than Japan not too different from Japan. The countries that have higher percentages of GDP collected in taxation include countries that we traditionally compare ourselves with like Canada most of the European countries that we compare ourselves with and certainly the Scandinavian countries. All liberal democracies have taxation needed to fund the services that people desire from their Government and vote for them to fund. Health education and superannuation are the largest cost centres justice is obviously also important.In respect of the statistic that we heard from David Seymour about 12 percent of taxpayers paying 48 percent of the income tax it brings to mind that saying Lies lies damned lies and statistics." because that's true as a statistic but it's really a misrepresentation of the underlying facts. So 12 percent pay 48 percent of the income tax and I haven't checked his number but I'm accepting that that's true. But of course in his population he forgets to say "Well that includes children that includes people who are out of the workforce raising children that includes superannuitants." He also conveniently overlooks the fact that GST as a proportion of income—which is a regressive tax—is a higher proportion of income for lower-income earners than it is for higher-income earners because lower-income earners consume all of their earnings whereas higher-income people save some of theirs and don't spend as much as a proportion of their income on GST-inclusive services. So again his statistics exclude the fact that GST is a higher share of the income of a lower-income person than it is of a higher-income person.Final point I'll make on that is that if we compare ourselves with the Australians across the Ditch their top marginal tax rate is higher than the 39c rate in New Zealand it's 45c in the dollar. So we compare pretty well on that one as well.In respect of the amendments that are proposed by the ACT Party and the National Party to get rid of the top tax rate of 39c over $180000 and the other rate adjustments we will be opposing those. And we do make the point that it really does show where both the National Party and the ACT Party sit that they would give thousands of dollars of tax cuts to the highest income and $2 a week to someone on $45000 per annum. So for those reasons the Labour Party will be opposing those amendments.CHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): Members the time has come for me to leave the chair. The House will resume after the dinner break at 7 p.m.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m."