Foss Craig: Taxation (Annual Rates and Budget Measures) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Foss Craig: Taxation (Annual Rates and Budget Measures) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:672;Page:18941] 
CRAIG FOSS (National—Tukituki) 
: 
 There is an old adage in politics: “Explaining is losing”. I admire the more senior departing member Pete Hodgson for trying to go to the rescue of his colleague Mr Nash who found himself on the front page of the paper the other day discussing things related to taxation and promoting perhaps the Labour turnover tax or whatever it may be called. Other members have tried to come to Mr Nash’s rescue. Even his party leader tried to come to his rescue. The sad truth of it in terms of Mr Nash’s career is that he is the Labour Party spokesperson on revenue and because that is his portfolio I presume that one day he would like to sit where the Hon Peter Dunne sits as the Minister of Revenue. But Mr Nash is now for ever tainted in the sector that he wants to become the Minister in charge of if you will: the financial sector or at least part of it. Every time that he gets up to speak we will be asking him and the public will be asking him to tell us about the turnover tax he promoted on the front page of the  
Dominion Post 
. 
I am sure—and we know that explaining is losing—that in order for that kind of story to get out it would have gone from Mr Nash to Mr Cunliffe and then it would have gone to the inner sanctum of Mr Goff so it would have had the total approval of the Labour Party and its hierarchy. There is a fair bit of back-pedalling and re-explaining going on. That does not matter. Mr Nash got on to the front page but I think it was for all the wrong reasons. 
What is the obsession that Labour has about increasing taxes? What is the obsession about that? We can recall way back to when Labour brought in GST. It went from zero to 10 percent and there was no compensation although Labour had increased taxes. When GST went from 10 percent to 12.5 percent Labour increased taxes but there was no compensation. The only time that Labour did provide compensation was when Dr Cullen was looking at the polls in 2008 and decided even he could not trust himself so he legislated to provide for the first tax cuts in about 9 years under the Labour Government. I cannot understand that obsession. 
The previous speaker talked about fairness. What could be fairer? About 72 percent of New Zealand taxpayers face a highest marginal tax rate of no more than 17.5 percent. How could that be made fairer? That is what is confirmed in Part 1 of the Taxation (Annual Rates and Budget Measures) Bill. How could that rate be made fairer? Although GST is not income tax GST has been confirmed as staying at the current rate of 15 percent. What could be fairer than providing that those who spend more pay more tax? The gentleman talked about progressive tax. Well there we go. If someone is on a higher income that person spends more and pays more GST. I do not understand the Labour members’ obsession. They try to use the word “fairness” yet they really get it wrong. 
Interestingly to go back to the story on the front page of the  
Dominion Post 
 the allegation was that farmers do not pay or the rural sector does not pay their fair share of tax. That is an interesting argument and I will address it as I am sure others will. 
Yesterday there was a protest outside Parliament. I did not know about it until I read about it somewhere. Just like Mr Cunliffe’s polling on the Budget which was conducted 2 days before the Budget a protest against the Budget was apparently held 2 hours before the Budget was delivered. But most interestingly I believe that the protest was organised by the Unite union. If we are talking about fairness in terms of tax and about an organisation that supports the Labour Party and that owes the Inland Revenue Department $200000 to $300000 of PAYE from its employees then I say that is not fair. That was in the newspaper. Next time I will bring to the Chamber the article from Stuff; it was from about a year ago. That is not fair. If members on the other side of the Chamber want to talk about fairness or otherwise I suggest that they think a bit more carefully. 
Finally these income tax rates also have the effect of confirming lower interest rates for longer for New Zealand. The ability to meet the cost of living by lifting after-tax incomes which is confirmed by Part 1 is enhanced not only by this bill but by the actions of this Government over the past two Budgets and the Budget we are talking about today. Fairness is enhanced the ability to own a home is enhanced and the ability to fund a mortgage is enhanced by record low short-term interest rates. Floating mortgage rates are at a record low and in some instances are almost half what New Zealanders had to suffer under the previous regime when those rates hit 10 percent and higher. When Labour members talk about fairness let us hear them talk about the fairness of the double-digit mortgage rates that we had under the Labour Government versus the single-figure 5 and 6 percent mortgage rates that we have under this Government as confirmed by the tax rates in Part 1.