Foss Craig: KiwiSaver Bill — In Committee 
Foss Craig: KiwiSaver Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:633;Page:4909] 
CRAIG FOSS (National—Tukituki) 
: 
 As earlier speakers have mentioned the National Party is opposed to this bill at this stage in its current form. First of all I would like to thank the members who were present at the Finance and Expenditure Committee consistently. I would like to thank the officials and also on behalf of National Party members to apologise to the officials. The apology is because of all the hard work the resource allocation and the time they spent on a bill that arrived at our committee was discussed was submitted upon and then was changed radically last week. I think that is an absolute abuse of process. Last Thursday about 4 hours before the second reading two radical changes were made to the bill. They are quite radical. 
I would like to take maybe 30 seconds to quickly go over the discussion we had in the committee around the mortgage diversion scheme. I will give that discussion verbatim for 30 seconds starting now. That is exactly it: there was no discussion around the mortgage diversion scheme. There was no discussion around a fundamental part of and change to this bill whatsoever. 
Brian Connell 
: Can we hear it again? 
CRAIG FOSS 
: I say to Mr Connell that he can hear it again. 
I would also like to replicate verbatim the discussions around the specified superannuation contribution withholding tax changes to this bill. Maybe I will take 10 seconds. This is the discussion verbatim over many months that the committee had about this bill starting now. The silence is absolutely deafening. I ask those listening to the radio out there to please tune in. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member is not to refer to radio listeners. 
CRAIG FOSS 
: I apologise. This is an absolute disgrace and an abuse of process. I have been here nigh on a year and I have learnt an awful lot in the last week about the process of Parliament and how one can openly and absolutely abuse it. 
The title of this bill is the KiwiSaver Bill. There is another “kiwi saver” scheme out there that is quite laudable and that we should all applaud. It does save kiwis. It saves our culture. It looks forward and it nurtures the environment. That of course is the Bank of New Zealand’s scheme for saving the kiwi bird. 
I would like to save Kiwis more money. On the pledge card an amount of $800000 could have been saved. The Working for Families package could have saved $16 million on its advertising. There are more opportunities. Kiwis need to find their savings from the $200000-odd talked about in relation to the Service and Food Workers Union issues at the moment. Kiwis could also save money from the $100 that a poor Auckland family is alleged to have paid to an MP regarding immigration matters. That is what counts. Those are the people on the ground whose problems need to be fixed long before a bill like this tries to come into play. 
This afternoon I asked the Minister of Finance a question which I will repeat: why did the Minister reject the unanimous opinion of the Finance and Expenditure Committee plus that of many officials when he decided to proceed with the mortgage diversion facility? Perhaps Mr Copeland was very convincing in his arguments to the Minister and maybe it is a $35 million cost to the fiscal books or perhaps it is $500 million over time. If Mr Copeland’s addition to this bill is worthy of that cost he obviously has a fair bit of pull. As I said the Minister of Finance could not answer as to why he rejected the unanimous opinion of the members of the all-powerful great Finance and Expenditure Committee. But he could not. The committee was totally unanimous. Very senior officials within various Government departments rejected any installing of a mortgage diversion scheme right away. 
I would like to point to some of the reports and press releases around this bill—especially on the changes last week. The Council of Trade Unions has a very good quote in its press release. Yes it waxed lyrical around the wonderful—in its opinion—bill but it states: “It is vitally important that in addition to employer contributions we see a continuation of wage rises so workers are better able to afford workplace savings.” That says absolutely everything: that people are struggling long before they try to make the decision to save for a house.