Foss Craig: Taxation (Urgent Measures and Annual Rates) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Foss Craig: Taxation (Urgent Measures and Annual Rates) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:651;Page:235] 
CRAIG FOSS (National—Tukituki) 
: 
 I am intrigued by mention of the New Zealand Superannuation Fund and I am looking forward to further debates on it with members opposite although I cannot quite see it in this particular bill the Taxation (Urgent Measures and Annual Rates) Bill. However the member obviously has some strong opinions on it as does New Zealand because that matter was on the table before New Zealand again at the general election and people resoundingly endorsed the National Party’s policy of up to 40 percent of the New Zealand Superannuation Fund being invested in New Zealand infrastructure as opposed to offshore infrastructure and being exposed to various risks. As the member is no doubt aware the recent updates included quite an asset write-down for the New Zealand Superannuation Fund. Perhaps 40 percent of that risk would not have been there if the funds had been invested in New Zealand in the first place. But anyway that is a debate for another day. 
Part 4 brings in the 2 percent plus 2 percent option. It was interesting to hear the previous speaker because as I noted in my first reading speech I recall being at the Finance and Expenditure Committee when the original KiwiSaver legislation came through and there were strong submissions on it. It was agreed by the Green Party and the Labour members of the committee and I think by the New Zealand First members as well that “2 plus 2” was very desirable and in fact was quite pragmatic; it was not some political philosophy or anything like that. There was simply a recognition that many New Zealanders cannot afford to save 4 percent of their gross salary. It was as simple as that—about 5.5 or 6 percent net. 
So I find it surprising that members opposite are arguing that it is a bad thing that we are going down to “2 plus 2” particularly when some of the unions that contributed to their election fund were in favour of that at the Finance and Expenditure Committee. Business New Zealand was in favour of this at the Finance and Expenditure Committee. In fact it is something that makes KiwiSaver—and it was Labour’s original policy—more robust more durable more sustainable and more affordable for all New Zealanders. It is as if somehow any higher contributions have been banned. This measure does not ban any higher contribution whatsoever; it simply allows the entry level to and the durability of KiwiSaver to be much more robust and sustainable at 2 percent plus 2 percent. If individual organisations want to negotiate different agreements with their employers so be it. What is the problem? There is an interesting silence opposite. 
I imagine that the next speaker will be the previous Minister of Finance. In previous speeches he has talked about pension portability and about how at risk KiwiSaver is because of the agreement with Australia in relation to pension portability and the discussions on that. He said that the Minister obviously had not called Australia that the Minister did not know what he was doing and that it was all at risk simply because of this 2 percent plus 2 percent rather than 4 percent plus 4 percent. If we read the press releases and watch television we can see that to quote the Australian officials there is no problem whatsoever. The key to the agreement that the Australians had was the fact that KiwiSaver was locked away until the retirement age of 65 years which is the same as their scheme. 
It is interesting that the current Opposition finance spokesperson was trying to dissociate or separate the New Zealand KiwiSaver scheme from the Australian scheme yet the previous Minister of Finance was obviously trying to bring the two closer. Maybe his hidden agenda was to income test superannuation because that is what the Aussies do. I presume Dr Cullen will speak next because we do not quite know about that. There is nothing at risk. Pension portability is not at risk. That is another red herring raised by that member opposite who is trying to be clever. Obviously he has far too much time on his hands these days. I tell Dr Cullen to get used to it but I am interested to hear his response because to quote the Australians again there is no problem whatsoever with the changes that the National Government is putting before the Committee today to bring the minimum contributions to KiwiSaver down to 2 percent plus 2 percent—locked in. There is no problem about portability whatsoever. Thank you.