Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:614;Page:10445] 
8.  
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: What is the total amount collected annually by central government from all taxes duties licence fees and levies for the purposes of road construction maintenance and road safety? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I am advised that the total in the categories referred to is $1481 million GST exclusive for the year ended 30 June. There were $58 million of GST-inclusive refunds. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: How is it that the Minister gave me an answer in the House 4 weeks ago in which he agreed that the real figure was $2223 million not the figure he has just given? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The question the member asked on this occasion was for the purpose of road construction maintenance and road safety. The number I have been given at this point for our total revenue is $1481 million GST exclusive. 
John Key 
: Noting the Government’s intention to release its Auckland roading solutions on 12 December is the Government intending to sanction a further fuel-tax increase either regionally or nationally; if it is what is the logic behind that decision given the surpluses the Government currently enjoys? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Funding for Auckland’s transport strategy will require a commitment to funding it over at least a 10-year period and probably longer. Perhaps at some time during that period there might be a National-led Government and therefore a great improbability of surpluses. 
John Key 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I know the Minister was thinking up his one-liner about a National Government but I wonder whether he could answer the question which was not about the 10-year funding period but about whether the Government intends on 12 December to raise fuel taxes above their current level in order to fix Auckland’s roads. That was the question. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The question was why that would be considered in the light of current surpluses and the answer is that we are committed to a long-term funding programme. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I ask the Minister again whether he will admit to the fact that this Government collected $2223 million— 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: From motorists. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Yes from motorists—for the ostensible purpose originally given in all those cases of building roads and for road maintenance and road safety; if that is the case what on earth is he doing seeking to justify a petrol-tax rise of 5c per litre to fund a $400 million expenditure to fix Auckland’s traffic congestion problems as reported in the  
Dominion Post  
on Thursday December 4 when he is currently sitting on an operating surplus of $1.96 billion and an operating balance excluding revaluations and accounting changes surplus of $5.58 billion? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Firstly we are not sitting on a surplus of $5.58 billion. That was the surplus last year and surprisingly enough we do not leave it sitting in my private piggy bank doing nothing with it in the meantime. The actual cash surplus was used to pay off debt last year. That money has gone. Secondly as I have explained to the member on many occasions the cost of capital associated with roading is not currently covered out of excise duties whereas on rail for example the cost of capital is covered by the current operators. Thirdly there are many other costs associated with roading that are not included in matters such as road construction road maintenance and road safety. 
Larry Baldock 
: Can the Minister confirm that if the Government decides to reduce the fuel-tax diversion—as indicated by his answer to my question yesterday—by even as much as 2.2c per litre it would be a greater reduction than that accomplished by Winston Peters when he was Treasurer and Deputy Prime Minister in 1998? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Yes I can confirm that and by sheer chance having looked up the member’s maiden speech I have found that the largest grab ever in New Zealand’s history for the consolidated account occurred in Sir Robert Muldoon’s first mini-Budget when he diverted the entire revenue from motor vehicles into the consolidated account. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I seek leave to table the 1998 Budget which sets out very clearly that for the first time in decades a Minister of Finance or Treasurer in this country sought to redress that anomaly. Had we remained in Government for 10 years there would have been a dramatic change and difference in the infrastructural investment on roads in this country. Mr Baldock should get his facts right. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection. 
Peter Brown 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I would not want to accuse the Minister of Finance of misleading the House but in terms of 1998 dollars 2.2c per litre is far less than 2.1c— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No no. The member may choose to use that as a debating point; it is not a point of order. 
Peter Brown 
: But he is giving the wrong information— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Please be seated. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Can the Minister explain why $2223 million in revenue was collected from all sources for the purposes I have outlined in respect of road construction maintenance and safety in the last financial year when only $1.4 billion made it into the National Roads Fund; and can he tell us why when there is an $823 million shortfall that is not being used for the purpose of road construction in Auckland he is just passing the buck again to motorists? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: As I said there are issues relating to the cost of capital for the roading system and there are environmental and other costs associated with roading. The present excise duty does not cover the full cost of the roading system. 
Peter Brown 
: When will the Minister produce the economic report that will justify diverting 18.5c per litre of petrol into the Crown account which he has promised for a long time: before the 12 December package is announced or afterwards so that the motorist is conned again? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I am advised—it is not my responsibility—that such a report in relation to costs will be produced next year. Auckland is demanding much faster answers than that. 
Peter Brown 
: Noting that answer is it not true that the best part of $1 million has been spent already on this report and does the Minister think it is satisfactory that we are waiting months for such an overdue report which will come out after the Government has introduced the legislation? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I cannot confirm that figure. I do not have any information in front of me in relation to the costs of what has been done. I know that a great deal of work was done on road costs in the 1990s. Much of that has always been around the issue of generating more income to improve our roading system over the long term. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Why is the Minister of Finance allowing himself to become a victim of a lie—which is that motorists are not already paying sufficiently for all the projects we may have in mind for the next 10 years—and is putting up an argument that is a clear case of creative accounting when he talks about the cost of capital? Is it not true that $823 million is currently not spent for the purpose it is collected and why is he taxing the motorist one more time? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: No. The cost of capital is not an aspect of creative accounting; it is fundamental. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: It is so. It’s just debt servicing. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Oh well it is no wonder New Zealand First has a rather strange position on economic policy with the cost of capital being regarded as an aspect of creative accounting! I will try to explain this to the member again: there are cost-of-capital elements and there are other costs associated with roading. My authority for that is no less than the Automobile Association and the road transport federation which just before the last election—undoubtedly not in collusion with any party in this House—estimated that if we were to cover the full cost of roading we would have to double the excise duty. 
Peter Brown 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Noting that that answer was somewhat frivolous I will be equally frivolous: can we have George Fairbairn here and we will really get the facts of the Government’s policy? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No that is not a point of order and the member knows it. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Why is it that Transfund New Zealand is currently sitting on $225 million in its bank account yet people will shortly be forced to pay another 5c per litre of petrol to fix Auckland’s congestion problems; is that not plain daylight robbery so that the Government can finance some of its other whacko projects? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I am sure some of that increased tax will be paid at night-time as well. But passing beyond that it is equally clear that if there is any change in excise duty only the proportion that is due to Auckland in terms of its population will go to Auckland. The rest will go to the rest of the country and the Auckland share will be matched by the Government.