Dalziel Lianne: Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Dalziel Lianne: Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:675;Page:20761] 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour—Christchurch East) 
: 
 I will raise exactly the same issue that I raised before but from a slightly different perspective. This issue was not done by way of Supplementary Order Paper but included in the provisions of the original bill—namely the issue of gift duty abolition being included in something called the Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill. I say that the Labour Party will be voting against this part and voting against the legislation as a whole because it contains this offensive provision. 
When we look at what a tax administration and remedial matters bill is for we see that it is not for a matter of significant policy such as the abolition of gift duty. That matter deserves to be part of a policy bill not something called a tax administration and remedial matters bill. I believe that it is a fundamental issue in terms of how these things are portrayed to the public when submissions— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: It’s misleading advertising. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: It is misleading advertising. When we think of the submissions being called for—the select committee puts a notice in the paper and says it is calling for submissions on the Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill—do members think that anyone on earth would know that that bill would include a policy matter? Would anyone think that? When I first arrived in Parliament some 21 years ago this year— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Oh! 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I know; I was just a child at the time. When I came here all sorts of things used to be hidden behind names like this one. We had the Social Security Amendment Bill that contained benefit cuts. We had the Finance Amendment Bill (No 2)—or 3 4 5 or whatever—again hiding all of these things. The title did not disclose what the detail of the legislation was all about. Here we have the Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill which is getting rid of gift duty something that surely should be subject to quite a significant policy debate. I object to the use of a tax administration bill to deal with a matter of policy. 
Let us turn to the matter of policy. When we hear from the Government over and over again that we in this country should not be dealing with matters that we cannot afford when we are looking at changes to benefits and when we are looking at all sorts of things as far as the Government expenditure side goes why is the Government reducing our revenue on the other side of the ledger as part of this? 
Hon Member 
: $1 million! 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: It does not matter how much we are talking about. 
Aaron Gilmore 
: Saving $65 million a year. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I am sorry that figure is nothing to the National Party. It is nothing to the National Party that $65 million per year is up for grabs as far as this provision is concerned. 
We are actually talking about the Government saying it will do away with a form of revenue for the Government at a time when it is preaching hardship for every element of expenditure on the other side of the ledger. I think that is outrageous. I think it is important that as a country we deal with these issues and we do it on a principled basis. The principle here is that we know that the removal of this particular duty will open up a significant range of tax-avoidance opportunities. We know that will be the case. The Minister in the chair the Minister of Revenue may well shake his head but I expect him to take a call on this part and to respond to this particular issue in order to tell us why no tax-avoidance opportunities—I presume that is what he is saying—are opened up by the removal of gift duty. 
He has already been part of a Government decision to benefit—what percentage of income earners benefited from the tax cuts that we had last year? The top 10 percent of income earners. Now that same group of people is benefiting again from changes to our gift duty regime. Abolishing gift duty in the context of the massive unaffordable tax cuts given to the top income earners in New Zealand last year by this Government strikes me as really just looking after the interests of those people at the very top and not really caring about those who have to pay for an increased cost of living without having any commensurate decrease in their amount of taxation. 
I think gift duty is part of a progressive tax system. Its abolition will favour those people at the top end of the scale. I believe it is important that Government members stand to take a call on this issue to ensure that proper analysis of it is undertaken. 
I also understand that members of the Finance and Expenditure Committee were deeply concerned about the inexactitude of the regulatory impact analysis process. They felt that it failed to achieve the requirements of a robust process. I would like the Minister of Revenue to respond to that as well.