Brash Don: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brash Don: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:250] 
2.  
Dr DON BRASH (Leader of the Opposition) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: Does he agree with the Treasury’s assessment that economic growth in New Zealand is probably “not sufficient to shift the country into the top half of the OECD within the next decade.”; if so when would he expect that goal to be reached? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 Yes. When we achieve it will depend in large part upon the differential rates of growth achieved by other OECD countries. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Can the Minister be a bit more specific about when the Labour - New Zealand First Government does plan to get New Zealand’s per capita incomes into the top half of the OECD given that the Prime Minister indicated back in 2001 that it was her Government’s intention to achieve this objective within 10 years and that now more than 4 years later Treasury is saying it is not achievable within a further 10 years? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I am grateful for the member’s confidence that this Government will survive to the point at which the country is in the top half of the OECD. [ 
Interruption 
] That was the literal meaning of the question if he cares to revisit it. On the second point I think the member has heard the explanation many times before: a graph or a diagram appeared in a document that was not authorised by the Prime Minister or me. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Does the Minister accept that with productivity growth rates in New Zealand still well below the OECD average per capita incomes will continue to fall relative to those in OECD countries and if he does not accept this what basis does he have for his optimism given that his own professional advisers do not share his view? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: No. Over recent years we have exceeded the OECD per capita income growth levels because of course productivity is only one of the elements in the equation. However it is fair to say that lifting the rate of productivity growth is amongst the top priorities for the Government’s economic policy. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Given the clear warning from the Minister’s own professional advisers that on present policies there is no chance of narrowing the gap between living standards here and living standards in other developed countries why does he insist on dismissing this advice? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The member should not put words into the mouths of Treasury officials. They are quite capable of uttering their own comments by themselves unaided. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The Minister did address the question. [ 
Interruption 
] Yes—the Minister did address it. Another question may be asked for clarification. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Has the Minister received any advice from professional economists that would lead him to have confidence that on present policies the gap between our living standards and those of other developed countries will narrow? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Even the most right-wing economist has to admit that over the last few years under a Labour-led Government we have closed that gap. 
Dr Don Brash 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. The Minister totally failed to answer the question. I did not ask a historical question; I asked whether he had received any advice from a professional economist suggesting we can in the future narrow that gap on present policies. He has not answered that question at all. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The Minister addressed the question but if he wishes to add a further comment— 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I suggest the member just watches a replay of business television this morning—it might have been a bit early for him—where he will see a professional economist talking about the Government’s policies. 
Dr Don Brash 
: On what basis does he a former history lecturer disagree with Treasury and the raft of recent international studies which suggest that reform of the tax regime could better support economic growth? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I also happen to be a mathematician. If I pick out for example the study referred to in Australia which figured in the National Party’s presentation of its policies that study first of all makes a fundamental error in terms of confusing correlation with causation. Secondly the actual data fit is extremely poor despite the large amount of mathematical apparatus used to explain the matter.