Duynhoven Harry: Budget Debate 
Duynhoven Harry: Budget Debate 
[Volume:639;Page:9618] 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Minister for Transport Safety) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to stand to speak in this Budget debate. It is just a pity I was not able to be here on the night of the Budget due to my being overseas at a meeting representing the Government. But it is a real pleasure now to speak in the debate having read the Budget speech and having seen just what the Budget delivers. 
It is 20 years almost since I first became a member of this House. Regrettably unlike you Mr Assistant Speaker I have not been a member continuously and you will well remember that our beginning here as new members of a Government in 1987 was a very tough time. David Lange that great New Zealand Prime Minister walked into our caucus on that first day when I was a brand new member and said: “You—Duynhoven! You weren’t supposed to get here!”. I grinned and said: “Well tough I am here now.” He said: “Yep and as a reward you can do in 1 minute’s time a 5-minute speech”—remember I am a brand new caucus member; I had never set foot in the place before—“on the two things this Government should do that nobody has talked about.” 
The two topics of my speech were proportional representation and the need for a fully funded individually calculated superannuation scheme where people made their contributions and knew what was in their account. My reason for being so keen on that—I have always been keen on a guaranteed superannuation savings scheme for our future—was that people had surety. I like many New Zealanders had seen and welcomed Labour’s 1972-75 Government and the marvellous superannuation scheme it put in place. It took a while to get in place because a complete change in public sector culture was needed. 
After just a few months of that scheme having been put in place a change of Government occurred. Bill Rowling had been deposed as Prime Minister. Rob Muldoon became the Prime Minister and used as a bribe the fact that he would be able to pay back to New Zealanders all their superannuation contributions. Actually people worked out what they would get back. He said he was an economic genius and that this country would be able to afford superannuation without people having to put into it other than through the tax system. We all know what a fallacy that was. 
It is a famous saying that those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it. The only danger with Michael Cullen’s marvellous KiwiSaver scheme is that National might be stupid enough to try the same stunt again. If it managed to do that then I sincerely hope it is not successful ever—the grandchildren of its members would curse them for it. 
We as a country now have the opportunity to build on what is a quite remarkable change in approach where superannuation is seen as a necessity for everybody— 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: If your productivity is stalled you’re not going to build anything. 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN 
: —because not everybody has the wealth that one or two of the blathering National Party people have to be able to be independently secure for the rest of their lives. It is all very well for people who are getting a two-for-one subsidy from the taxpayer on a fairly substantial chunk of their income for their superannuation to be scathing about those who want to see that extended to the general public. 
We often hear about how New Zealand—according to the National Party—is a highly taxed society. Its members keep comparing us with Australia but they forget to count in little things like the fact that it costs people A$800 to register their car. It is less than $200 in New Zealand to do that. That is a tax I say to Dr Smith in case he had not figured it out. There are a whole lot of things like that such as the Medicare Australia programme which people in Australia pay into as well—on top of their taxes. The income tax rates are higher here but those are all things that people forget to calculate in. 
In this Budget we see a real emphasis on moving ahead to a stronger savings culture for New Zealand to sustainable growth to transforming our economy and to ensuring higher living standards for all families in New Zealand. We have seen years now of what the business community least expected: a Labour Government responsibly running the economy addressing the need for sound fiscal management and managing to correct the imbalances in the economy. One has only to think back to what National Governments’ legacies were in the past to see why it was so necessary to have the sort of direction Labour has taken. 
A sustainable future for New Zealand over the long term is vitally important to all of us and especially to our children. Those who do not have children probably think about this in an academic way but those of us who have children know that they look ahead to what might be achievable for them and to what will be there for them. If our legacy is to burn up their future—which is what National has done before with its borrow-and-hope policies—then that is a pretty poor commentary on our ability. I am delighted that this Budget sets in place really strong foundations for the future. It guarantees superannuation—as long as there is a Labour Government because National of course has made it very clear that there is no guarantee as far as it is concerned—invests in families gives us the opportunity as a country to move ahead invests in education invests in health care for all New Zealanders and makes a real difference. 
I say to members opposite that they have to make up their minds. They cannot keep harping on as we heard Dr Smith do before about the huge number of bureaucrats. Would a National Government cut the public service? Those members opposite talk about tax cuts but when incomes are cut there has to be a cut in spending. At the same time they blather on about the need for this and for that and for everything else and about how they will spend this and how they will do that. Yet a little time back—only 15 years or so ago—National ran an election campaign that was fundamentally dishonest. I do not want people to forget that that happened. 
In 1990 National ran an election campaign that promised all sorts of things— 
Chris Auchinvole 
: Back to the 1990s! 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN 
: Yes back to the 1990s. I do not want people to forget that campaign because they had to put up with 9 years of a lying Government. It lied its way to power. When I pointed out that I had heard John Banks in New Plymouth spell out the sorts of things that National was going to do Labour ran ads telling people to watch out for their holidays because those would go under a National Government and their sick leave would go under National. We pointed out all those things— 
Chris Auchinvole 
: Oh how miserable it was! 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN 
: Well we understated it because when National became the Government what it did was vastly worse than what we had said. What happened? We saw 9 years of cutting. We saw superannuation cuts. 
I remember having a ride with Maurice Williamson in a car in 1998. We were going to a conference and we both happened to be on the same plane. He had a ministerial car and said: “Harry hop in.” I had a half-hour haranguing from Maurice about how bad New Zealand First was because it had refused to allow superannuation to be cut below 60 percent of the accepted 40-hour-a-week average wage. He was absolutely furious because National had set its sights on a rate of 55 percent. 
This Budget sets a sound foundation for the future. I am delighted with KiwiSaver. I think there are so many things in the Budget that will make a difference to New Zealanders. The Working for Families package is enhanced and low wages are enhanced. 
We see a need to ensure that people do not forget what National will do when it is desperate to get power. People should not forget what we saw in 1990 and previous to that in 1975. I do not want people to forget that because we must ensure that we keep this Labour Government in power in order to guarantee superannuation and all the other things that we see as being a normal part of New Zealand life for the future.