Anderton Jim: General Debate 
Anderton Jim: General Debate 
[Volume:675;Page:14400] 
Hon JIM ANDERTON (Leader—Progressive) 
: 
 What do we know this week about the National Party’s economic policies that we did not know last week? We have found out that they do not have any principle. National Party members’ policy is to say just whatever they think their audience wants to hear. 
Last week John Key went to Southland and what did he have for the people of Southland? He had a $200 million subsidy in the form of a suspensory loan to form a commercial meat export company. This is the most cynical form of naive pork-barrel politics we could ever imagine. It is a return to the worst excesses of Muldoonism. The meat companies never even asked for the loan. The subsidy is supposed to help them create a megamerger company for the export of meat. The megamerger might well be a good idea. We will have to see. But the meat companies have to produce a business case for it. If John Key has seen the business case I would be surprised because I know that it has not been formed yet but when it is we will see it. It might well need assistance from the Government through legislative changes for example but it will not need a cash handout; nor should it get one. It will not need us taking away money from schools hospitals or the police and giving it to the most important foundations of our economy. 
If we have to subsidise the primary industries’ system in New Zealand we are in big trouble because that is where 65 percent of our export earnings come from. What would happen if we go back to subsidising agriculture? We would take an immediate hit in our major markets around the world. Retaliatory tariffs would be imposed before the sun came up. Our trade negotiations would be laughed out of every forum around the world. But the long-term effects are even worse than that. Farmers would get the message that they do not have to adapt to market conditions and they do not have to build successful creative or innovative businesses. If they want cash they can just invite John Key and Bill English down to the paddock for a romp. 
What does this policy tell us about National’s vision for New Zealand’s economic development? It tells us it does not have any. National has no ideas about the way to make New Zealand more innovative. It has no ideas about the way to make our businesses more competitive globally. National has no ideas at all about the way to improve our international connections but it has a fair idea about the way to destroy them. It has no ideas about what agribusinesses actually need. It can put up taxes on average New Zealand families to pay for cash handouts to export businesses that can succeed without them. But that is National’s policy. 
We know that is National’s policy because National members in this House this week could not even answer a most simple question: under National would a household with two kids and on the average wage get a tax cut of the same size as a family with $100000 of income? National will not answer that simple question because the answer is no it will not. Every other party in this House could answer that question but National will not answer it because the answer is no. There will not be room for tax cuts for “Joanna Average” because National is taking out any tax cuts in order to return subsidies to the agricultural sector. That was a policy in the 1970s that led to a top marginal tax rate of 66c in the dollar. That is what happens when every part of the economy tries to subsidise every other part. 
When National is faced with hard decisions it cannot be trusted to make the best call for New Zealand’s long-term interests. I watched those backbenchers over there. I watched the face of Mr Groser. How would he ever stand up and answer a question on that with any credibility in any of the forums in the world he used to trot himself around? I wonder whether he was told about this great new subsidy policy. How would he ever hold up his head in the areas in which he has walked before? What about Bill English? The  
Southland Times 
 said: “When National Party finance spokesman Bill ambled across the paddock Mr Key quickly told him ‘I’ve just committed you to a suspensory loan.’ ” Did Bill say “Shock horror! What have you done?”. Mr English replied “As long as it’s under $200 million I don’t mind.” Oh well so much for Bill English’s financial credibility. 
National has no fiscal credibility. Its members have the credibility of a sailor in a saloon. They are completely cynical. They are far too inexperienced for Government office. The official National Party policy is now to bring back Rob Muldoon’s “family benefits for sheep”. That is it. They have had 9 years to think of a policy and that is the one they have come up with. I cannot believe it. I always knew that John Key was a flake but I did not know he was an absolutely ridiculous stupid flake and that he would go to Bill English’s electorate and tell the people there with Bill beside him that they are going to give them a $200 million bribe. How many electorates are there in the country? Sixty-nine or so by the time of the next election. So we have had one which has cost $200 million and there are only 68 to go. I am going to count as National goes through each electorate to see how much this is going to cost New Zealand.