Swain Paul: Budget Debate 
Swain Paul: Budget Debate 
[Volume:647;Page:16391] 
Hon PAUL SWAIN (Labour—Rimutaka) 
: 
 What a thoroughly disappointing contribution that was! One of things that is supposed to happen in a Budget debate such as this is that the Government puts up its plan—and it has; all the documents we see on the Table are Labour’s plan. Then the Opposition the National Party is supposed to put up its plan and we have a debate and the public of New Zealand get the chance to decide which one they like better. That is what is supposed to be happening here. But from National we have had the dance of the seven veils. National members have stood up in this House and whinged whined grizzled and groaned. They have not given us one skerrick of policy—not a sausage; not a thing. Bill English had 10 minutes to say something and he did not say a single solitary thing about what National would do. I will ask the National members some questions about that so I just let them know that will be my general line of approach. 
I want the National members over there to answer two simple questions. The first is this: if they are so critical about Labour’s tax cuts what will National’s tax cuts be? How much will people get? It is a very very simple question. How much will people get? People know what the Labour-led Government has delivered because it is sitting there on the Table of the House. They know what is in the Budget and I will talk about that in a minute. So the first question is: how much will people get from National? Mr Key has said a number of things. He has said it will be more than $50 a week so we assume it is more than that. But does it mean everybody gets $50 a week or does it mean some people get $50 a week and some people do not? 
R Doug Woolerton 
: He’s changed. 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: He has changed—and I will talk about that in just a minute. That is the first question. How much will people get? People are asking that. They want to know what National will give them because National has been whingeing and moaning about tax cuts for 9 years. Here was the chance for Bill English who supposedly will be the Treasurer or the Minister of Finance to tell us what he would do. He had 10 minutes to tell us that. There was not a thing—not a sausage; not a skerrick of a policy. 
The second question I ask National members is this: how will they afford it? Where will the money come from to fund this $50-plus a week tax cut? 
So there are two simple questions: how much will people get and where will the money come from? I think those sorts of responsible questions need to be asked in a debate like this and National needs to come clean. Mr Key has said that National has a taxation policy but it will not tell anyone what is in it just now. Do members know what I think? I think that is because the National members do not trust the voter. They simply do not trust voters enough to tell them the policy now. Why are National members holding out on New Zealand voters? Why are they now saying they are going to give people a tax cut but they are not going to tell them about it just now? Why? Is it because the National members think voters are too thick to understand the policy or do they think it will not be generous enough or will be too generous? What is it about the National Party that means it will not come clean and tell people what they will get and how National will afford it? 
I think that is a problem. 
R Doug Woolerton 
: That’s the worry. 
Hon PAUL SWAIN 
: I think that is the problem as Mr Woolerton quite rightly says. It is a worry for National. I think National has been flattering people by saying it has a tax policy. I do not think it has one just yet. I do not think National was expecting what Dr Cullen delivered and now it has had to go back to the abacus and try to work out what it means. We all know basically what National will do. It will give people who are wealthier more and people on lower incomes less because that is just the way of the National Party. That will fail one of the tests that Dr Cullen has set. 
Of course the people in the National Party do not understand that over these last eight Budgets we have had to restore the mess we inherited in 1999. We have had to do things like making doctors’ visits cheaper and lowering the cost of prescription charges—those were important things. We have had to expand health services screening and immunisation programmes—all the things that people have been calling for. The list goes on: 20 hours’ free early childhood education interest-free student loans building thousands of State houses increasing superannuation rolling out better funding for broadband increasing the transport infrastructure providing more police allocating more funding for defence and so on. Dr Cullen knew of course that the time would come when the economy would go soft and there would need to be some funds there for that. Every household knows; every household knows one puts a little aside for the bad times. Now of course the economy has got softer than it was yet Michael Cullen has delivered tax cuts exactly as he said he would do. So we mean what we say and say what we mean; it is as simple as that. The National Party of course does the exact opposite of that. 
What does the Budget actually mean for people? A two-earner family with two children aged under 13 years and with incomes of $45000 a year and $20000 a year—$65000 a year all up—from 1 October will get $42 extra a week and by 1 April 2011 they will get an extra $84.55 a week. A one-earner family with two children under 13 and with an income of $45000 a year will get an extra $30.83 a week from 1 October and an extra $62.82 a week from 1 April 2011. A two-earner family with one child under 13 and with both adults earning $20000 a year will get an extra $35.16 a week from 1 October and $67.76 a week from 1 April 2011. Members will note that all of those figures are north of $50—that is the point. A one-earner family that earns $45000 a year and has one child under 13 will get an extra $27.85 a week from 1 October and $56.42 a week from 1 April 2011. A one-earner family on $35000 a year and with one child under 13 will get an extra $16.21 a week from 1 October and $30.94 a week from 1 April 2011. Members can see that the Labour-led Government has been very upfront about what it is doing. 
What about superannuitants? From 1 October 2008 the increase per week for a married couple is $45.88 and for a single superannuitant who lives alone it is $23.84. In addition to that is a very very welcome suggestion in my electorate from New Zealand First of free public transport for superannuitants during off-peak times. That is a very very good idea. So you see the Labour-led Government with the support of its support parties has come up with some concrete ideas and laid them out before us on the Table. 
Now what does John Key say? First he said that the tax cuts would be north of $50. Then when he was pushed on it by Paul Henry he said National would announce its policy on the campaign trail. In February 2008 he talked about tax cuts of $200 to $300 a month. Then he said to Sean Plunket that the tax cuts would not be smaller than Labour’s. He said that they may be larger than that but they certainly would not be less. A bit later he said to Sean that of course National had a policy for a tax cut programme and had been advocating it for about 6 years. The presenter said: “Well why not tell us what it is you’ve had for 6 years?”. That is a fair question; it is the very question I am asking here. Why does John Key not tell us that or is he jigging it in response to this Budget? John Key said: “Um I’m not going to tell you our tax cut package now.” That is a problem. 
National could afford tax cuts in only a number of ways. It could cut public services and we know it would do that. Everybody knows it would do that; there is no question about that. Do members know why? It is because National Governments always cut public services when they are in office. I also reckon that a National Government would sell State assets and I do not believe it would wait until a second term in office in order to do so. 
The National members will not tell people how much they will get by way of tax cuts and they will not tell us where the money will come from. That is why this has been a disappointing debate by the National members. The public has a right to know what the National members have planned and I challenge the next National speaker to give us an idea of what that plan is.