Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 20 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12579. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]8.Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour)to theMinister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement that one of his main priorities for 2013 is to “bed in” welfare reforms “because that is where by far the biggest fiscal benefits lie”?Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance):Yes but I would point out to the member that any fiscal benefits arise from getting people off dependency on welfare and into work which has a benefit for them and a benefit for the community. It also benefits the Government’s books. I might say that the early signs of the impact of welfare reform are positive.Hon David Parker: When he was weighing up the $30 million taxpayer-funded corporate welfare payment to Rio Tinto why did he decide that getting the Meridian Energy fire sale through was more important than securing genuine—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption ] Order! I ask the member to look at the preliminary question that has been asked. He must ask a supplementary that is connected to that.Hon David Parker: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It might be convenient for the Government for us to completely signal everything in a primary question but it was about welfare payments and so is the supplementary question.Mr SPEAKER: Well I certainly did not hear that part. I will invite the member to ask his question again but if it is in relation to welfare and the welfare system I will accept that argument from the member.Hon David Parker: When he was weighing up the $30 million taxpayer-funded corporate welfare payment to Rio Tinto why did he decide that getting the Meridian Energy fire sale through was more important—Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Questions need to be based on reasonable propositions. You cannot make an assertion like that and expect that the Minister would treat it seriously. To suggest that there is a whole activity taking place here—Hon David Cunliffe: That’s not a point of order.Hon Gerry Brownlee: It is actually. [Interruption ] Well he would be very encouraged—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Would the member just finish his point of order. I did not catch who was interrupting.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Well he referred to a fire sale. That is not a reasonable thing to do in a question even if it were close to the primary question which relates to welfare reform.Hon Trevor Mallard: There are lots of types of welfare. Some of it is the sort that Paula Bennett is in charge of and some of it is of the sort that the Minister of Finance is more directly responsible for and tends to be in the form of one-off grants to companies. This question did not refer at any time—at any time—to the type of welfare for which Ms Bennett is responsible.Mr SPEAKER: I have heard sufficient. On this occasion I agree with the points raised by the Hon David Parker and the Hon Trevor Mallard. It does refer to welfare. I think it is a long bow but it still does refer to welfare and I will accept the question. In regard to the point made by the Hon Gerry Brownlee quite often supplementary questions have some quite significant assertions—some wild assertions on occasion. I leave it then for the Minister to deal with that in the way the Minister chooses when he answers. So we will now have the question repeated by the Hon David Parker.Hon David Parker: When he was weighing up the $30 million taxpayer-funded corporate welfare payment to Rio Tinto why did he decide that getting the Meridian Energy fire sale through was more important than securing genuine employment guarantees for the smelter workforce?Hon BILL ENGLISH: We do not apologise for having a bias in favour of jobs. That runs through the wide range of policy including welfare policy. We understand that the Opposition is against jobs but we are for them.Hon David Parker: Why has he added Chorus to the corporate welfare beneficiary list by overriding the Commerce Commission’s determination regarding copper broadband pricing resulting in a wealth transfer of up to $160 million from consumers to Chorus shareholders?Hon BILL ENGLISH: The member is speculating on what might or might not happen in respect of the Commerce Commission’s determination. But as I understand it that member’s party is in favour of the roll-out of ultra-fast broadband—Hon Steven Joyce: No no—they’re against.Hon BILL ENGLISH: Oh they are against it now? OK so they are against the jobs at the smelter they are against the roll-out of ultra-fast broadband they are against mining on the West Coast and they are against drilling for oil—Mr SPEAKER: Order! That answer is sufficient.Hon David Parker: Given that his Government has signalled its intent to override the determination of the Commerce Commission on copper broadband pricing how can other businesses and investors expect a level playing field when his Government continues to pick winners and dole out corporate welfare when it suits?Hon BILL ENGLISH: As the member will know from his interactions with businesses their confidence is generally rising. They have got a pretty high level of confidence actually in the Government’s policy framework. That member will also know that business sees the Government as reasonably pragmatic. Occasionally we make decisions such as in the case of the smelter to ensure that the contract was signed and completed. It is not the preference of the Government to do that regularly if at all but in that case we believe it was warranted. If we had not made that payment and had that contract secured the Opposition would be saying today that we were indifferent to the jobs of several thousand people in Invercargill.Hon David Parker: Why does his Government treat big businesses much more generously—Chorus Rio Tinto and Skycity—while thousands of smaller businessesand other smaller telecommunications companies that follow the rules continue to struggle?Hon BILL ENGLISH: The member is simply not correct. In each of the examples that he quotes the Government has made some pragmatic decisions such as in the case of Chorus to secure the roll-out of ultra-fast broadband. If the member believes that he could have secured that—perhaps up to 10 years earlier than the network might have been completed—by some other method then he should let us know. The Government does not apologise for the occasional pragmatic decision to achieve the greater good. In respect of smaller businesses the Government has an extensive programme much larger than it was under the previous Government to support businesses of all sizes to innovate to invest another dollar and to employ another person and it seems to be working.