Woodhouse Michael: Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Woodhouse Michael: Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11103] 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) 
: 
 I begin by congratulating the member Mr Boscawen on the aplomb with which he is able to build matters relating to the emissions trading scheme into every single call he takes in the House. Tonight was a bit easy because there was a little bit of that topic on the inflation figures. I think we need to make it a little bit harder for him. I propose a bit of Order Paper bingo and I hope that when the following bills come up he is able to mention the emissions trading scheme with the same aplomb: the Cultural Property (Protection in Armed Conflict) Bill the Gambling Amendment Bill and the Oaths Modernisation Bill. I look forward to those bills coming to the top of the Order Paper and hearing how he will handle mentioning the emissions trading scheme in debate on those bills. 
I look forward very much to talking about the many many good things in this Budget but I cannot resist addressing some of the nonsense that has been spoken by our friends on the other side of the House. Their response to this outstanding Budget has been frankly anaemic weak half-hearted and quite misleading. I will start with Mr Nash and his Rolling Stones tie. He said: “(I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction”. Well that is not what we have heard. I take the issue of the inflation rate. It has been mentioned and it is true— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: What goes around comes around. 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE 
: That is right. I think that has been proven. Yes inflation is higher this year for reasons that are well understood by everybody but the Opposition. But the Opposition will not tell people that this is a one-off adjustment. Next year it will be 2.4 percent the year after it will be 2.4 percent and the year after that it will be 2.4 percent. What happens to the tax cuts? They stay and endure for a very very long time. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Bad mistake tonight sonny boy. 
MICHAEL WOODHOUSE 
: That is not the mistake. We know that there is absolutely no doubt that the inflation figure would have been much much higher had this been a Labour Budget. It would have been materially higher. Labour’s spokesperson on finance Mr Cunliffe said as much in the  
New Zealand Herald 
 this morning: “If Labour were writing today’s Budget it would spend more than National to ensure the recovery from recession remained on track.” So there it is: Labour would spend its way out of recession and continue to tax the heck out of hard-working New Zealanders. Well that worked for Greece! It worked for Portugal! It worked for Italy and Spain! The UK is in a similar mire. Mr Cunliffe would take New Zealand down exactly the same tax-and-spend track that got those countries into trouble into the first place and it would not stop there. 
I will mention the emissions trading scheme. Labour’s emissions trading scheme would have imposed double the cost and it would have been introduced sooner than this Government’s scheme. That would have added to inflation. More consumption leads to higher borrowing and higher borrowing drives up interest rates. That is an unacceptable burden on hard-working New Zealanders. Electricity prices went up 72 percent under the 9 years of the previous Labour Government and I have no doubt that that would continue were Labour back in Government. 
Where is Labour’s alternative budget? It does not have one. Labour does not know what it would do. Labour members crusaded around the country in a bus that said “Axe the Tax”. They did not need a bus; they could have saved on gas and travelled in a two-door Morris Minor. That is about as much interest as they got. They would have had enough room for a suitcase and a six-pack. But the slogan did not ring true. Would they axe the tax? We do not know the public do not know and the commentators do not know. The reason is that even Labour members do not know. Labour members cannot even make up their minds on whether to axe the tax they said that they would axe. That confusion was still evident in Mr Cunliffe’s first call about loss attributing qualifying companies. He saw them as terrible things. I think he said that yes Labour put the system in place but it saw it used for purposes that were never intended. God forbid that loss attributing qualifying companies were used to attribute losses! That is consistent with the sort of confusion around the tax arbitrage that Labour created over 9 years. These arbitrage measures are being put down. 
I really want to focus on the last thing that unfortunately Labour members still do not get. Three-quarters of income earners will now have a top tax rate of 17.5 percent which is nearly half what they had when the previous Government came into office. For that reason alone this Budget will be applauded right around the country by all but the 20 percent of people who still support Labour.