Goldsmith PaulHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): Thank you Madam Speaker. National will be supporting this piece of legislation the COVID-19 Response (Taxation and Social Assistance Urgent Measures) Bill. Ordinarily we wouldn't be wildly enthusiastic about rushing through legislation involving tax and social security changes. Ordinarily you would want to spend many months having a select committee process and making sure that things have been done properly and we're not having unintended consequences but we understand the need to move swiftly. This is part of the Government's COVID-19 response.The broad point that we make is that most of the measures here are longer-term ones which will be lasting either permanently but will have an impact on business over the next four years particularly in the Budget process. So they might have a very small impact: reducing the depreciation rates for example on non-residential buildings—a good idea. It was something that was taken away back in 2010 in the middle of the global financial crisis and we're not opposed to restoring that.It certainly is not something that is necessarily going to make the difference this week or next week over whether a company stays in business or not. It's not a short-term crisis response; it's a longer-term one. That's the case with a number of these things. So increasing the low-value asset threshold which has been stuck at $500 for a very long time—that's absolutely totally appropriate to increase that. We support that and we support the use of money interest remission.The only point I'd make is that some of them have a time limit on them and some don't. I think the removal of the hours test for the in-work tax credits should have a time limit on it if it is brought in so families—working families—who have a reduction in working hours as a result of COVID-19 do not lose their eligibility. Well then it should be a short-term thing rather than a permanent thing; the idea of the in-work tax credit was to encourage workers to have the in-work tax credit.The changes for the Working for Families tax credit entitlement for emergency benefits likewise could be time-limited if the purpose of it is to deal with the response to COVID-19. So with those comments we're supportive of it but we make that point that they should have been time-limited.In terms of the winter energy payment I'm sure that a lot of people will be happy to receive that. We'd just make the point that we believe the focus for the urgent spending that we're talking about in response to COVID-19 really should be on helping those who are in the process of losing their jobs in particular and on reducing the number of job losses so that more businesses can survive. That I think should be the absolute focus of the massively increased spending that we're seeing at the moment—trying to reduce the number of businesses that fall over through this period.The only other point I'd make is that the Government has responded enormously quickly to make a number of changes to make it slightly easier for businesses to survive. I am disappointed that they haven't been prepared to postpone the minimum wage increase due on 1 April for a few months because there'll be a number of businesses right now who are in a desperate desperate situation and they would be struggling to understand why the Government sees fit to increase wages on 1 April right in the middle of the biggest existential business crisis that they've ever faced. But that is an anomaly that the Government will have to explain.But all in all we support this bill and hope that it will make some step towards helping some businesses survive. Thank you Madam Speaker.