Mallard Trevor: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
Mallard Trevor: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:669;Page:16088] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I accept the member’s word that briefings were offered. I am assured by people on my left that Supplementary Order Paper 187 in the name of the Hon Peter Dunne was not given to people at that briefing and that the draft legislation vehicle was not supplied a month ago as was indicated by the Minister in the chair the Minister of Revenue. In fact it was put on the Table of the House or was first seen by me late last night. I say to that Minister who of all people should know better than others that this is not the way to do taxation legislation that the key point is that we should get such legislation to a select committee and have hearings on it there. Otherwise if we take this sort of approach legislation that might otherwise get support from Labour will be rejected and fought over on matters of process and detail right to the end because of the approach that has been taken.  
Part by part and if necessary clause by clause this Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill will be fought against because National and its stooge Minister will not send the bill to a select committee. National members will not stand up have hearings and follow the process. I would have thought that the Minister who used to be very very close to Sir Geoffrey Palmer in his approach to legislation would feel absolutely ashamed about this. This is the fastest lawmaking in the West. I say to Mr Dunne that Sir Geoffrey Palmer would have assumed even then that this sort of legislation would go to a committee because that is the way we do it in New Zealand. We do not bring in Supplementary Order Papers in the middle of the night and under urgency expect them to be pushed through with this sort of approach. Maybe this is part of a play for Washington on the part of Mr Dunne. [ 
Interruption 
] Oh he wants London. I am sorry; I apologise. He wants London not Washington. I do not know what possesses the Hon Peter Dunne who over the years has generally worked with both National and Labour Governments with integrity on tax matters. He was someone who pushed process on both Governments and did things in the appropriate way. He slowed people down but now he is fronting an approach that is wrong.  
Taxation is not an area of absolute expertise of mine but I have looked at it pretty carefully in the area of policy development because it is an important area. Getting it right is very important and much of the stuff in this bill might otherwise have got support. In fact some of us are of the opinion that the Minister is not going far enough in terms of the things he is doing. Some areas could have been added to this bill and the Minister might have been able to get broader support for Part 1 and the amendments. But through his approach he has lost the support of Parliament and legislation that could possibly have gone through the Committee in half an hour after a select committee hearing has turned into a debate that will I am sure take the rest of the normal sitting time today to work through.  
I will now go back to the very beginning of the Supplementary Order Paper. I will be critical. I do not want to reflect at all on the people who are drafting the bill but I will be somewhat critical of the Minister. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I just remind you that we are now on clauses 3 to 20. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: That is what I want to focus on and in particular on new clause 10B which is set out on the Supplementary Order Paper. I want to check Mr Chairman that we are talking to the Supplementary Order Paper—the relevant parts of it. And can I check that we are talking about in this particular case new subclause (7B) through to new clauses 19B and 19C? Can I check that those are the particular parts of the Supplementary Order Paper that we are talking to at the moment? Can I confirm that is the case? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: We are on new clause 10B and new clauses 19B and 19C. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: So not new subclause (7B)? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: We are on new clauses 19B and 19C—because those are within clauses 3 to 20. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: But can I check going to the front of the Supplementary Order Paper that we are not talking about— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: No that amends clause 2.  
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I am sorry; I apologise. That is one of the problems I think when we take this sort of approach. I am obliged to the Chair. I was looking at the subclauses rather than at the clause. I am obliged to the Chair because that means that when we get back to clause 2 I can make the points I was going to make on it but I am sure that that will be at some stage later in the evening.  
I would have thought that having a clause on the zero rating question as part of a non-controversial Supplementary Order Paper would be a little stupid and could be described in that way. It gives an opportunity to my colleagues who I know are very very concerned that other matters should be zero-rated. Some of my colleagues are very very concerned about what should be zero-rated and what should not be zero-rated. I am sure that by the time I have finished my speech my colleague Stuart Nash will have put his name on and signed a Supplementary Order Paper that will be tabled to add to the question of what should be zero-rated if in fact we are to consider the zero rating of services. In new clause 10B we get to the question of what should be zero-rated and what should not be zero-rated. The member will table a Supplementary Order Paper and I am sure that over the next hour or so as we discuss the other parts of Part 1 we will be able to have a debate on the question of zero rating.  
The fact is that this matter has been brought into the bill and I presume that the Chair has ruled that it is within scope. Can I check that there has been a ruling from the Chair on the Supplementary Order Paper bringing in zero rating? 
I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I want to check that the Supplementary Order Paper has been ruled to be within scope and that the zero rating question has been ruled to be within the scope of the bill. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: It is in scope. I ask the member to continue. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Thank you. Now that it has been ruled that having the zero rating of items is within the scope of the bill it opens up the question of zero rating for other items. I know there are colleagues on my side of the House who are fiercely keen on having other items zero-rated and will be very keen to move Supplementary Order Papers in order to extend this opening which the Minister has clearly opened up in the bill.