Blumsky Mark: Budget Debate 
Blumsky Mark: Budget Debate 
[Volume:631;Page:3316] 
MARK BLUMSKY (National) 
: 
 I thought it was timely after many hours of debate to remind myself of the amendment that was moved by Dr Brash at the start of the debate: “That all the words after ‘that’ be omitted and the following inserted: ‘this House has no confidence in this Labour-led Government because for seven years it has demonstrated a lack of vision and a lack of the policies to transform New Zealand into a high-income high-growth nation and has instead wasted the opportunities provided by buoyant international conditions by over-taxing New Zealanders and wasting billions of taxpayers’ dollars on low quality spending programmes.’ ” That amendment is fully supported by the National Party and I urge the other parties in the House to support that amendment as well. 
There are some very key phrases in Dr Brash’s amendment—“lack of vision” “lack of policies to transform New Zealand” “over-taxing” and “wasting billions”. Those phrases are key because they describe exactly the behaviour and activity of the Labour-led Government for the last 7 years. The debate gives me the opportunity to send a very clear warning to New Zealand. If people believe that this country is running smoothly and all is well they are being lulled into a very false sense of security. If they believe that then they are becoming complacent. New Zealand is developing into an uninspired society. 
The Labour-led Government has no vision. It is an old and very tired Government. The Budget introduces new policies and initiatives that will take New Zealand backwards not forwards. I will give a real-life example of exactly what I am talking about and it concerns the Working for Families package a programme that captures then holds New Zealanders in a frame of mind that is truly dangerous. Three weeks ago I had the joy of being in Christchurch and I met up with a close relative. He said to me: “Hey it’s really good you know. I didn’t realise it but I now qualify and get a cheque every week for 127 bucks. It’s great. I love it.” Then he said to me: “What was interesting though was that just the other day the boss asked me if I wanted a promotion. I said: ‘Done! I’d love a promotion.’ and he said the promotion was worth five grand. But then I said that I didn’t want that promotion because I would lose my 127 bucks a week.” 
I tell the House that I had a real go at that young guy. I asked whether he realised what he had done. He said no because he was getting 127 bucks a week. But I said to him: “But you turned down a promotion!”. He repeated that he would get to keep the 127 bucks a week but I said: “Had you not thought that if you took that promotion and the pay rise maybe after that promotion there might be another promotion and you would start getting ahead?”. Then his wife piped up and said: “But it is nice to get the $127 because we can now buy a Lotto ticket every week and we could not before.” I thought: “My goodness me! You have now lost your aspiration you have now lost your drive and your entrepreneurial spirit has gone.” That 127 bucks is locking them into a benefit yet they think they are lucky because they can buy a Lotto ticket every week. It shows that no longer are there incentives to work harder. The tragedy is that hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders will probably be as easily trapped as that young man and his family. Just where is his future? Where is our future? 
In my maiden speech I talked specifically about why I entered Parliament. I want my daughter and her peers to stay in New Zealand when they grow up. For sure she is allowed to go overseas for an OE but I want her to return to New Zealand and live here because she believes this is the country she wants to live in and because it offers her opportunities. But the 2006 Budget gives me no confidence that the Government understands the incentives needed for us to get ahead and for us to have a country where my daughter and her peers will end up wanting to live. 
If National had won the election its first Budget would have been totally focused on the measures needed to make sure that incentives were built into the economy through affordable tax cuts that would allow hard-working Kiwis the chance to get ahead because of their own efforts. Our Budget would have seen 85 percent of taxpayers paying a tax rate of 19 percent or less. We would have put a heck of a lot more money into desperately needed infrastructure and we would have ferreted out the waste in the Public Service. Budgets are about long-term planning. Budgets are about focusing on the kind of New Zealand we want in the next 20-plus years not a whole lot of little Band-Aids to fix problems and to score some fast points in the polls. 
In the last few weeks I have had the pleasure of travelling around New Zealand meeting those working in local government and those working very hard in small business. We all know I am sure that those two sectors make a huge impact on New Zealand and more important they have a big impact on our future. 
Lindsay Tisch 
: We’re a nation of small businesses. 
MARK BLUMSKY 
: We are a big nation of lots of small businesses. 
Both local government and the small-business sector have serious issues that the Government needs to address now and has not taken the opportunity to address. The rates of most local authorities are going berserk. The reason is the compliance costs the standards that have been imposed by the Government on local government. The Government says: “Do this please local government. And we want you to do that please. We need you to do this and you have to do that. Oh and by the way when we tell you to do this and that we ain’t going to give you a cent to do it with. You have to fund that out of the ratepayer’s pocket.” That means that in many local authorities in New Zealand rates are going berserk. In terms of the standards imposed councils that have delivered tap water of high quality are now having to spend millions of dollars to make the water meet a standard that the Government has decided is a better standard and most of that spending will probably in many instances be put on lawns and gardens. 
As I said I visited many small businesses. Two significant issues arise. The first is compliance and regulation because 95 percent of small businesses that I spoke to which would be 100-plus in the last few months have all said to me there is far too much compliance far too much regulation. The Budget had an answer—let us have another review! 
Lindsay Tisch 
: Another committee. 
MARK BLUMSKY 
: Another committee! Maybe it will be a case of third time lucky. 
So much for the Budget in terms of helping small business. The second issue was the risk they face employing staff. Small-business people pay staff out of their own pockets and there is a huge impact if they get it wrong and pick the wrong staff member. Small businesses are saying that the 90-day probation period would help immensely. By the way business tax cuts would add real value to a small business. It would really help the pain. But what was there in the Budget? Nothing. 
The danger is that New Zealand is becoming complacent. We are developing an uninspired society. We are not developing a future we can look forward to. We are not developing a future for our best and brightest because unfortunately they are leaving.