5. Question No. 5—FinanceHon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 5—Finance5. Hon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana) to the Minister of Finance: What advice from Treasury if any has she seen on the amount of revenue that will be gained by the Government from the enactment of the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products Amendment Bill?Hon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance): I am advised that regardless of the enactment of the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products Amendment Bill excise revenue is predicted to continue to gradually decline as smoking rates continue to decrease. In preparing the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update last year Treasury did a rough estimate of tobacco excise revenue assuming the continuation of the current smoke-free regime that has existed and been successful for many years. Their estimate was that maintaining the current smoke-free regime involving regular increases in tobacco excise and which has seen smoking rates fall dramatically would result in additional revenue of around $1.5 billion in total across the four-year forecast period compared to the changes due to be implemented from later this year. I'd say two things to the member: first those numbers are very rough and better forecasts will be included in the Government's books as part of the Budget update; and second that revenue whatever it turns out to be will go into the consolidated account and be used for spending on hip operations teachers' pay and Working for Families just as that revenue was used by the previous Labour Government.Hon Barbara Edmonds: Does she agree with the statement made by Nicola Willis we have to remember that the changes to the smoke-free legislation had a significant impact on the Government books" in response to questions on how she will pay for tax cuts in the absence of the foreign buyers ban; if not why not?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: I tend to agree with myself yes.Hon Barbara Edmonds: Is she aware that the Ministry of Health modelling shows that an estimated $5.25 billion can be saved in health spending and if so how can she justify her support for rolling back world-leading smoke-free legislation when a simple cost-benefit analysis shows the cost to the health system outweighs the benefits of the revenue gained?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The Government is sticking with legislation and initiatives that with bipartisan support have seen smoking rates drop by 60 percent in the past 11 years and we are advised those settings will continue to drive smoking rates down.Hon Barbara Edmonds: How can she reconcile the Government saying on one hand "It is our intention to bring smoking rates down." but on the other hand she needs smoking rates to stay the same or increase to bring in $500 million in tobacco excise per year to help pay for tax cuts?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Because the member has got it completely wrong. We are expecting that excise—[Interruption] Well the member either wants an answer or she doesn't. We are expecting that excise revenue will continue to gradually decline as smoking rates decrease. And I have been specifically advised that there will still be a declining trend and with the assumed decline in tobacco consumption more than offsetting the continued increases in excise revenue that we do on 1 January each year.Hon Barbara Edmonds: What is the priority for this Government: tax cuts funded by more New Zealanders smoking for longer or the health and lives of everyday New Zealanders?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The priority for this Government—SPEAKER: Just a moment. That question is not in order. I'm not going to rule it out; the Minister can answer but you need to think about how much assumption is put into questions that Ministers are required to respond to.Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Mr Speaker I'm very happy to talk about the Government's priorities which are to strengthen the economy so that we can address the cost of living which has been at a crisis for the past two years; increase the jobs and incomes available to New Zealanders; ensure they can keep more of their own money; deliver better front-line services in health and education where attendance rates have plummeted; and increase law and order by delivering more police.Hon David Seymour: Is the Minister of Finance aware of reports attributed to Victorian police in Melbourne that last year 27 convenience stores were attacked with firebombings as part of stand-over tactics believed to be connected with the illicit tobacco trade and if she has considered the impacts of illicit tobacco on both health and the Government's books does she believe that it's actually time to bring a bit of reality into this debate?SPEAKER: That was also another interesting question that goes well beyond the responsibilities of the Minister. I know you couch it with "has she considered" and therefore it can go ahead but I think you've got to be careful about how much assumption we put into questions.Hon Barbara Edmonds: Point of order. I seek leave to table a Treasury Official Information Act request that documents the forecasting in relation to tobacco excise due to the changes in legislation.SPEAKER: Are you tabling a request or a response?Hon Barbara Edmonds: I'm tabling the response.SPEAKER: Is it publicly available?Hon Barbara Edmonds: Not that I'm aware of.SPEAKER: Well OK. Leave is sought. Is there any objection?Hon Member: Is it publicly available?SPEAKER: Well is it? I'm asking the question. [Interruption] Hang on I'll deal with this. I'm asking the member: is it a publicly available document?Hon Barbara Edmonds: Not that I'm aware of.SPEAKER: I'll put the leave. Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I ask the Minister whether or not it's a fact that the success of the present Government's plan is in the forecasts of the tax for tobacco and cigarettes being hundreds of millions of dollars less than Grant Robertson was forecasting in 2020?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Well look the Deputy Prime Minister makes a good point as did David Seymour before him so I'm going to address both questions in one. I think that's a good way to do things. We do have to be very conscious of the black market because what the regulatory impact statement—Hon James Shaw: Point of order. I just wanted to refer back to earlier Speakers' rulings around the use of patsy questions to attack the Opposition.SPEAKER: With regards to what?Hon James Shaw: The question that the Deputy Prime Minister asked then was—SPEAKER: No sorry; it can't be a patsy if he's referring to Budget numbers. That's not an unreasonable question.Hon James Shaw: Well I'll withdraw the use of the word "patsy". Nevertheless the supplementary question that the Deputy Prime Minister asked was clearly an attack on the Opposition.SPEAKER: Well I'm sorry; I didn't see it that way. So we'll finish that answer and then I'll have to go back to David Seymour because I managed to cut him off getting an answer. So he'll probably have to ask his question again in a better way I hope. [Interruption] No no—hang on. We're not finished here.Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Mr Speaker perhaps I can help the House by addressing two questions in one. Minister Seymour's question was about the black market and this is a very real concern because the regulatory impact statement for the previous Government's legislation warned specifically that—quote—"The illicit market has been increasing and recommended policy changes are likely to exacerbate this." I would point out that the only people that benefit from a flourishing black market are criminals and gangs. In answer to the Deputy Prime Minister's supplementary question he makes a good point which is that the revenue that the coalition Government is likely to receive from tobacco revenue in the forecast future years will be considerably less than was received by the previous Labour administration in 2020 where they earned $2.2 billion in tobacco excise revenue which they happily invested in roads hospitals schools and the like.SPEAKER: Thank you. I'm sure that satisfies you Hon Seymour; it certainly satisfies me which is all that matters."