Clark David: Land Transfer Amendment Bill Tax Administration Amendment Bill — Third ReadingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeClark David: Land Transfer Amendment Bill Tax Administration Amendment Bill — Third Readings[Sitting date: 10 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6544. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North): I do take the focus of the last member’s speech on my every utterance on this bill to date as some kind of flattery. It is I guess the only area that he is going to find some substance to speak about because we have heard nothing from that member about the bill.But on to the bill because I think that it is important. It is important that we understand what this bill does and does not do because as a Parliament we are going to be required—I have little doubt—to come back and fix this mess. The history is there of bills such as this one that have not got the systems in place behind them to deliver and then require further parliamentary legislation.We know that it is a flawed bill. We know that it is not going to capture all the information that would actually be useful to capture and a widening of its scope would also require a visit back to Parliament. We know that each bill that goes through Parliament from memory costs over $1 million in terms of staff time in terms of the researchers—in terms of all of those things. It seems kind of crazy that we as a Parliament would put something through like this—that the Government would be so out of touch with New Zealand that it would put something through like this without recognising that it could have done a much better job. It seems arrogant to take that approach but that is what we are seeing more and more from this Government.We do support the policy objective of gathering information on offshore residential homebuyers but because of the loopholes in this legislation we think that it will not prove particularly effective in gathering data that will be of use for making policy decisions in the future. We know that Auckland house prices are out of control. They rank on world unaffordability tables and we know that something needs to be done. But here is a Government designing window dressing measures rather than actually addressing the nub of the problem: to bring those house prices down to ensure that New Zealand families can afford homes in their own country so that that Kiwi dream of homeownershipis kept alive to earn decent wages and the other things that have been undermined by this Government.The register of buyers as it is proposed by the Government proposes exemptions for the main home. It will increase compliance costs and create loopholes in the way that this is defined and in the data collection measures. Let us for a minute consider what this new “greatest connection” test might mean. I suspect that we will hear soon from Alastair Scott again about the feeling—you know “the vibe”; maybe “home is where the heart is”—and we will ask ourselves if Alastair Scott finally bought a house in his own electorate would his feeling be in that house or in the house that he lives in in Wellington? I know from talking to Kieran McAnulty who runs in the Wairarapa as Labour’s candidate—a very strong candidate—that his heart is there where he lives in the Wairarapa. He has run a strong campaign against Mr Scott who is seen as being a candidate from elsewhere and it is very hard to believe that the sense of connection is so great when he chooses to live somewhere else—I mean it really is hard to understand.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Maybe it is your turn to come to the bill.Dr DAVID CLARK: Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. But joking aside I think this is a very serious issue. It is not defined in law what the “greatest connection” to a property means.We are here creating unclear law. We are creating law that is going to require the courts to address it or Parliament to fix it. That is crazy stuff from our Parliament; that is crazy stuff from this Government which is really focused on the window dressing and not on actually delivering a solution that will make a difference for New Zealanders for Aucklanders facing those crazy house prices and for the New Zealand economy where in real value wages have dropped. Wages are in recession right now in the last quarter if you look at it that way. This is an economy that has stalled. It is an economy with a Government that has not managed it; has not diversified it. We have got multiple problems and yet we have this kind of half measure—this kind of watered-down measure—as a proposal.We know it was rushed through we know it was announced at the last minute and that is why there are so many inadequacies in the legislation. I refer here especially to the material that was tabled last night in the House that outlines the period of time in diagrammatic form from Land Information New Zealand that it is expected that these records of buyers will be recorded by hand—handwriting; there will be officials handwriting for 3 months.I would also like to point out a point that was not raised. In the fine print here it says “Even under ideal conditions LINZ cannot guarantee with this legislation passing in August”—and we are already beyond August—“that the desired changes can be efficiently and effectively implemented by 1 October.” This scenario we have been presented with—with officials writing this foreign buyer registerby hand—is an extremely optimistic scenario. It says that. It says in the points to note underneath the scenario that has been drawn up by officials: “The dates and the time frames in this time line are based on the best-case scenario and are highly dependent on a range of parties agreeing to work at a very fast pace.” I do not hesitate to say that that also requires nothing to go wrong in the process.This is a rushed process. The Government knew it was under pressure. It introduced some half-baked measures to make it look like it was doing something on housing but of course whomever it was trying not to offend—the property speculators in Auckland that it is associated with—it did not want to offend them and it did not want to put through legislation that actually made a difference and here we are in the Parliament now passing cynical legislation.In my view it does not achieve what it ought to achieve and it costs the taxpayer money to put it into place. It will increase compliance costs and not produce the outcome that was its originally stated purpose. It does create some small bit of information and that is why we will be forced to support it—because it is a small tiny step in the right direction—but it is needlessly weak. These half measures could be made so much better if a proper bill was adopted. If the Treasury advice was taken on how this package was put together it would have been way more effective. The Government departments were very clear that the Government was not achieving the things that it had verbally said it wanted to achieve and we know that we are going to have to revisit it. It is from a Government that has been more and more often afraid or deliberately not straight-up with New Zealanders and we on this side of the House recognise that that is not a long-term strategy.I want to also highlight some of the quotes from recent times that point to just what a rushed piece of legislation it is. John Key said: “We are not hostile to the idea of a register we just don’t think it takes you very far.” John Key said: “I genuinely don’t know. We haven’t asked for any work on a register.” John Key said: “It’s quite a tricky thing the register. It’s not quite as straightforward as people think. So we’re not afraid of a register.” He said: “I wouldn’t want to say never do anything forever because that would be a bit silly.” He said: “We are not sort of absolutely resolute that it’s such a terrible idea. We just think that we have fairly good information already.” Well if the Prime Minister believes that why on earth are we here again today? If he believes that the information is good why would we be here again today? Of course the answer is that this is a politically driven bill; it is not designed to actually solve the problem that we have been given.Nick Smith—again some wonderful quotes from Nick Smith. A register would be “a distraction” that would cost “mega millions without doing a thing to tackle house price inflation.”—this is Nick Smith of course before the legislation. It is a real shame he is not here making a speech to explain how he has come to his current position. He is probably out researching housing sites in cemeteries in Auckland. Or maybe he is out looking—Phil Twyford: Power stations.Dr DAVID CLARK: —for power stations to build them next to. It is hard to know. Nick Smith also said “This is just about politics. It would be a waste of public money.” and here we are doing it.This Government is at sixes and sevens. It is so obvious when you look back at the quotes that this is a politically inspired move not a solution to a public policy problem. Then—Nick Smith again: “I do stand by my statement that a register would be a waste of money.” We have Nick Smith saying it over and over again. I could go on. There are so many quotes. Let us have one more—let us have one more: “It is a non-issue. It has not changed in the 5 years that we’ve been in Government. Let us focus on the things that matter.” That is Nick Smith arguing why we should not be here today. But here we are working a bill through the House that officials have said will not work anyway.It is a bill that is a political solution to a public policy problem. We will be back here to fix it. It is a damned shame that this Government has not seen fit to actually—actually—address the Auckland housing crisis. It has not seen fit to look after the interests of the economy by tackling that problem as well. It is a Government that is out of ideas I am afraid; out of touch and arrogant enough that it thinks it can put this through Parliament without any protest. Well New Zealanders are getting wise to this Government and I think that when we come back here they will not be happy.