Dunne Peter: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Dunne Peter: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:629;Page:1077] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 The speaker who has just resumed her seat raised some issues relating to the Maori people that we in United Future would say have application to all people. She quite properly spoke about the unleashing of the potential of every individual in a family in a community to achieve the best that was available to him or her. We would say that the fundamental responsibility of any Government is to follow policies that will enable all New Zealand families—all people in this country—to have that opportunity and she is right to draw attention to it. Because sadly in the debate thus far this afternoon that point has been missing. 
We have seen claim and counterclaim. We have seen the usual back-to-school approach that characterises every year the resumption of civilities in this House but we have seen very little in the way of a concrete contribution to issues that will benefit the people and the individuals that make up this great country. 
One of the reasons that we entered into a supply and confidence agreement with the Labour-led Government after the election was that we were far more interested in being able to make some gains on behalf of New Zealanders and some progress towards making this a better country in a variety of ways than merely staying on the outside throwing the occasional rock that may or may not hit its target but would leave us feeling pretty good just for the privilege of being able to do so. 
In the time that I have available to me this afternoon I want to talk about some issues that are of particular relevance both to our agreement and also the ministerial roles that I hold. Mention was made in the Prime Minister’s statement of the major review of business taxation that is now under way. This is going to be an important step because in many senses it is the first major review on a comprehensive basis of New Zealand’s business-tax arrangements since the 1980s. We have had a series of changes since then—a series of new initiatives introduced—but we have not taken the time to stand back look at the way in which our business-tax regime is structured the objectives that we want for it in terms of maintaining competitiveness with our major trading partner boosting productivity retaining at first and then seeking new investment in New Zealand and creating opportunity for our people. 
We must never forget that 90 to 95 percent of our businesses are small businesses and that for them the ability to operate profitably effectively and make a contribution is just as important as for those we might traditionally regard as the large-business sector—the glamour people of the industrial era. So it is important to have a regime that reflects the need to keep this country—of 4 million people as it is—on as much of a front foot as we can and the changes that we will be announcing in due course are aimed solely at that achievement and they will be a positive step forward. 
I am reminded when I hear those who now say “We aren’t going fast enough.” of these two facts. The issue was not in the manifesto of the Government at the last election and in the Opposition party’s manifesto it ranked well behind personal tax changes. So we will see change and that has got to be encouraged and advanced. 
Harking back to the point that was raised by the previous speaker about the role of communities in fostering opportunity and building strengths one of the great features of New Zealand is the commitment that volunteers make—the work the charitable sector does. The fact is that if they were not there performing that work to the degree that they do our taxes would be much higher to boost the gap that that would create. So it is important that we review our charitable-tax regime—and we will be doing so—to give greater recognition to those who donate to charities to ensure that now that we have a regime in place through the Charities Act which registers and identifies our charities we can also have a tax regime that more fairly reflects the work that they do and the benefit that they contribute to New Zealand society. 
I go back to the previous speaker again. She talked a lot—and I agree with her—about the heritage and the value of New Zealand the pride we all have in what this country is about and our determination to preserve that. But sometimes our determination can be hijacked by meaningless and trite slogans and we put policies in place that look good and sound good but do not work. I am pleased in that respect that one of the early achievements of our agreement with the Government was the cancellation of the carbon tax because it was clearly unworkable. It was not going to achieve the purposes set for it and it was certainly not going to help us meet anything like our Kyoto obligations. I welcome the move that is now in place to have a much more industry-specific set of solutions recognising that the conditions of particular industry sectors will differ and the capacity and the influence that they have in terms of their contribution to Kyoto issues will also differ. 
I think that is a sensible step forward. No one doubts the risk to our planet or the damage that global warming poses. If they do I invite them to read Tim Flannery’s book  
The Weather Makers 
. It is a very good analysis. It is very soft however on solutions. To suggest that the complexity of environmental degradation can be resolved simply by a $200 a tonne carbon tax as he does is fatuous. But the analysis of the issues is correct. I think that the approach we are now taking is a far more balanced and sensible one than was in vogue a little while ago. I see the ACT member opposite who has a member’s bill coming up next week regarding— 
Heather Roy 
: Are you supporting it? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: We will be supporting it. I think it is an important step forward and I want to outline the reasons why. This relates to the removal of the exemption currently enjoyed by Pharmac in terms of the Commerce Act. We have had a situation in the last few days which gives some substance to the call that we made in our agreement for the need to develop a national medicine strategy in which I am involved as Associate Minister of Health. The Herceptin issue which is causing a great deal of anguish and pain for many women in New Zealand is a classic example of what happens when one rations the availability of pharmaceuticals by price in the absence of a wider policy environment that recognises the role that pharmaceuticals can play in constructive medical care. 
 That is also the type of issue that relates to enhancing the ability of people to live their lives in confidence and a measure of certainty and to achieve their potential. That is going to be an important challenge in terms of ensuring that what has been to date a system that has worked effectively on regulating supply by price can now be balanced by a wider policy framework recognising the value of technology the contribution of new medicines and the demands that people place upon them. 
This year is going to be one of challenge. Real issues face this Parliament and the parties within it. Simple sloganeering—throwing rocks for the sake of it—is not going to advance the cause of our people one iota. I implore all members whatever their perspective on issues and whatever their view to concentrate on promoting issues not personalities; and matters of substance not trivia; and to work together to try to get some constructive solutions. That is what our people sent us here for and that is what they will ultimately thank us for having achieved. It is a challenge we could well do our best to live up to.