Scott Lynda: Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
Scott Lynda: Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:617;Page:13507] 
Dr LYNDA SCOTT (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 Part 2 is fairly technical. It deals with the actual tax implications of the Future Directions (Working for Families) Bill. This bill is all about the difference between Labour and National. It really demonstrates that. Labour is very keen on re-establishing the welfare State and that is what this bill is all about. It is about socialism—about taking tax off people and the Government then making its choices about how it is spent. We certainly heard from the people reported in the  
Dominion Post  
this morning who said that those on middle incomes will miss out again as they always have missed out. Another couple said they would be happier if there were taxation cuts rather than benefits. Why do they want that? Why do middle New Zealanders want taxation cuts? It is because they want a choice about how they spend the extra money in their pockets. They want to be able to choose where they have their childcare assistance. They do not want to be dictated to about having to go to a State provider. 
People want to choose where they might be able to spend a little more money and buy a bit of health insurance because under this Government they cannot get a hip or knee replacement to save their life. More money may have been put into that in the Budget but that is only because this Government was doing less major-joint surgery than in 1999 when National left Government despite an ageing and increasing population. That is clearly shown in the  
Health and Independence Report 
 to the Minister last year—on page 174 if members would like to look it up. We also see cataract surgery is in that list so it is true that someone has to be blind and in a wheelchair before the Government will help that person. People talk about wanting to have taxation cuts rather than a benefit or they say they hope that those on middle incomes may actually benefit from the Budget but they have not. 
There is nothing in all the pages in Part 2 of this bill that will improve growth in the economy. I think most people would much prefer to have better jobs than to have this Government hand them out a little bit here and a little bit there. They would prefer to have better educational opportunities better jobs and higher incomes. People would prefer to be like our Australian cousins who are $180 a week better off than us today—not in 2005 2006 or 2007 which is what this Government is handing out in its drip feeding. No today the Australians are better off than we are and most New Zealanders would like to see an investment in things that will create growth for this country and bring us back to the same level as our Australian cousins. 
Some of the language in this part of the bill is interesting. Section KD2(6B) inserted by clause 29 states: “For the purpose of subsection (6) a ring-fenced family support recipient”— 
Judith Collins 
: What does that mean? 
Dr LYNDA SCOTT 
: What is a ring-fenced family support recipient? The bill is not going to a select committee; it is being rushed through the House. I would like the Minister in the chair Dr Cullen to take a call and tell us what a ring-fenced family support recipient is because that is the sort of language that is in the bill and without the scrutiny of a select committee it will be difficult to come to understand the details of how the legislation will impact on people. There are sure to be problems and we are sure to see some amendment bills. There is a family tax credit a family support credit and a child tax credit. 
I sat here in the Chamber and listened to Government members give speeches of envy. They talked about the people on the Opposition side of the House being rich. I have to tell Government members that a whole lot of people on the Opposition side of the House grew up in poor social circumstances and worked extremely hard to get where they are. We know that rewarding effort by being able to have a better education and earn more money is exactly what is needed. I started my working life as a nurse-aide at Porirua Hospital and it was better education that got me to where I am today—through being a nurse and a doctor. That is what people want. Those people in the Labour Party who are a bunch of unionists and teachers and who generally have not done a hard day’s work in their life are the ones who have not got their hands dirty.