Smith Lockwood: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
Smith Lockwood: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17942] 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
: 
 In speaking to the title of the Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill I think we have to reflect back over the history of this legislation. I was one of the few who was in this Parliament in 1990 prior to the passing of the Fiscal Responsibility Act. I was one of the Ministers who faced the consequences of the dishonesty of the outgoing Labour Government. That Government presented a Budget and Dr Cullen was one of the finance Ministers involved. It was Mr Caygill who presented the Budget but Dr Cullen was his Associate Minister. They presented a Budget to this Parliament that claimed from memory a $79 million surplus. When the books were opened after the election far from a $79 million surplus this country faced a deficit climbing to $5 billion. Back in those days that was a large chunk of our GDP because it was a smaller GDP in those days. The consequences of that were just colossal. 
The incoming National Government determined that that should never happen again that it should not be possible for a Government to deceive the taxpayers of this country the public of this country the way the outgoing Labour Government did in the late 1980s. That is why National introduced the Fiscal Responsibility Bill and that Act has served this country well. It has provided the opportunity for everyone involved in the process of Government for taxpayers and citizens of this country to see the Government’s books opened regularly to see how the financial affairs of their country are going. 
What we see with this bill is a moving of that iconic legislation and the burying of it within the Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill. We have to ask ourselves: what is Labour trying to do here? We know that Labour does not like scrutiny and transparency. We know that Labour likes to be able to fudge things. We know that Labour likes to be able to interfere. If we look at this bill we see it coming through. The Minister will be able to give more directions than has been possible in the past. Our State sector reforms in this country during the 1980s and 1990s were recognised worldwide as being at the cutting edge of good government. What we are seeing now is this Labour Government saying: “Oh we want to have more opportunity to meddle here.” 
It seems that the Labour Party loves getting its political tentacles into these things and this legislation provides for much more ministerial direction. It will enable the Government to fudge things much more because the output classes can be aggregated with this legislation. There will be less transparency. We know that Labour likes handing out money. Look at its Community Employment Group handouts that have embarrassed it so much with the hip-hop tours and so on. We know that Jim Anderton’s handouts his corporate welfare have had the Audit Office saying there are some real problems around the handing out of this money. We know that Labour loves doing it and wants a legislative framework that fudges all of this much more. 
National is saying that it is bad for this Government to be making our financial affairs in the State sector less transparent to be providing for greater political interference. It is sad for this country that we are dealing to iconic legislation like the Fiscal Responsibility Act. I suppose when we think about it Dr Cullen hates the fact that the Hon Ruth Richardson was the author of the Fiscal Responsibility Act. Dr Cullen hates to have an iconic piece of legislation with the name of a Minister like the Hon Ruth Richardson on it. The best way to change that is to repeal the legislation and bury it in this Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill that will bear his name. That kind of pettiness does not serve this country well. The Fiscal Responsibility Act was serving this country well. It could have been amended slightly perhaps to sharpen up some of the procedures but the transparency was hugely important. Its iconic status was hugely important. I suspect what we are going to get from Labour if it ever wins another election is something like a “Social Responsibility Bill” that will have all the soft woolly wonderful stuff that these left-wing Labour politicians want to have. 
Brian Connell 
: The PC Act. 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH 
: My colleague Brian Connell says it will be the PC Act. It will be politically correct diatribe. National is opposed to this legislation not because of some of the ideas being sought but because the detail is bad.