Ryall Tony: Taxation (KiwiSaver and Company Tax RateAmendments) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Ryall Tony: Taxation (KiwiSaver and Company Tax RateAmendments) Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:639;Page:9469] 
Hon TONY RYALL (National—Bay of Plenty) 
: 
 I cannot help but agree with Lindsay Tisch’s contribution. I thought it was right on the money—and I will tell members about the money. New Zealanders are not going to get any of it. 
I am strongly opposed to these proposals in Part 2 of the Taxation (KiwiSaver and Company Tax Rate Amendments) Bill because Government members have not answered the three important questions I asked them earlier this morning. I have listened to this debate and I have not heard one member opposite answer any of the three key questions that I asked earlier. 
The first question I asked was how a low-income person in Otara benefits from this bill. If he or she cannot afford to save anything what is benefiting that person in this bill? 
Shane Jones 
: You said that this morning! 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: And the member did not answer the question. I am repeating the question. I ask the member “Mr Tamihere” to take a call and to answer the question. [ 
Interruption 
] I ask the member to answer the question. The first question is how low-income people in Otara will benefit from this if they cannot save. What in this bill will increase their pay packets and give them more incentives? Nothing in this bill will do that. The second question is this. What effect will this have on the pay packet of a low-income person in Otara? The Labour Government has got employees into these multi-employer contracts so that everyone gets paid the same regardless. The union representatives of those low-income people in Otara will go to see the employer and the employer will say that there will be a 2 percent reduction in their pay increases because that is for KiwiSaver. That is what Dr Cullen said would happen. He said that the increased burden on business can be paid for through lower pay increases. 
So what will happen to that low-income family in Otara that is not in KiwiSaver is that their pay will be suppressed by the people who are in KiwiSaver because that is the way Labour has industrial relations these days—one gets paid the same regardless. Well what will the Government do about that? I have not heard a single answer to that question in the debate today. The question is simple. How will the Government stop low-income people having their pay increases suppressed because some of their workmates may be in KiwiSaver under multi-employer collective agreements? It cannot answer that question. 
The third question that Labour cannot answer is this. What in this bill will actually make people wealthier when they work hard? What is the incentive in this bill for people to work hard get ahead and keep money in their pockets? None of those three questions has been answered in this House today. Frankly that is simply not good enough. 
But let us look at what also is affected by Part 2—the lower company tax rate and the impact that will have on Part 2 particularly in some of the later clauses associated with the bill. I want to quote this comment which was made in 2001 and I want Government members to answer this—I wonder how they will rebut this argument: “The actual benefit of a lower company tax goes to foreign resident shareholders for whom it is in the main the final tax. Leaving aside the political question of whether our fiscal priority is to give tax breaks to foreigners the core question is whether this actually attracts any new foreign investment. Since this is a small increase in what is left over from profitable investment is the business community really saying to me that the profit potential of investment options for foreigners here versus elsewhere is so finely balanced that this will swing deals? I doubt it”. 
And who is the person who said that it is important to identify that for New Zealand resident shareholders “company tax is merely a withholding tax. They are eventually taxed at their marginal tax rate” and that the principal beneficiaries are foreign investors? Who said that? Dr Michael Cullen. He is the man who year after year has opposed lower company taxes saying that they will not work and that they do not benefit ordinary New Zealanders. The point of the National Party is this. The priority should be lower personal taxes for New Zealanders. Yes; send that message out to every home in New Zealand. Ring it out loud. The priority is lower personal taxes because that is what helps the poor person in Otara. KiwiSaver does not help the poor person in Otara and this Government cannot in any way argue that it does.