Dalziel Lianne: Taxation (Budget Tax Measures) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Dalziel Lianne: Taxation (Budget Tax Measures) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:654;Page:3964] 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour—Christchurch East) 
: 
 I am pleased to take a call on the first reading of the Taxation (Budget Tax Measures) Bill which is being passed through all stages under urgency. I think the bill is wrongly named and has been brought to the House rather quickly today. National was able to table it only after the urgency motion was moved. I think what National meant to call the bill was the “Pre-election Promises (Post-election Breach of Faith) Bill”. That is what the bill should have been called because that is precisely what it is. We had pre-election promises that we were told would not be put on the chopping-block no matter what happened. 
I ask a question of the Prime Minister of New Zealand. I ask John Key what he means by the words “personal guarantee”. Is it not interesting that the words “personal guarantee” when one thinks about what they are intended to mean mean that a person will stand behind his or her assurance and personally guarantee the result of the outcome? 
Let us have a look at what John Key actually said in the letter he sent to every single household before the previous election. I am told that the covering note sent with the pledge card stated: “Well unlike Labour I’m going to be straight-up about my priorities. That’s why I’m sending a card to all of you. It’s called ‘My key commitments to you’ and it will be delivered to every household in New Zealand over the next 10 days.” I will read out the introductory clause and first key commitment on the card that John Key sent: “If National is elected to lead the next Government I personally guarantee that we will—strengthen the economy increase after-tax incomes and ensure Kiwis can get ahead under their own steam by reducing personal taxes on 1 April 2009 1 April 2010 and 1 April 2011.” 
Not only did John Key say that but he signed his personal guarantee as “National Party Leader”. That first commitment has a red cross through it. It is not the Red Cross Society as in who might save us in an emergency situation; it is a red cross for a failure to deliver on the personal guarantee. I think that is where Brian Rudman’s comments come into play. I do not really care what Steven Joyce the previous speaker thinks about Brian Rudman’s comments. Brian Rudman was simply making the point—and quite reasonably so—that people were very clear in September last year. I will quote from the article: “Yet back on September 30 last year Mr English was mocking then Finance Minister Michael Cullen for being over-cautious on the issue. He said: ‘Dr Cullen cannot be trusted to deliver on any future tax promises.’ ” He compared that with National which will—and I quote from Mr English—“have an ongoing programme of personal tax cuts. It will be a responsible programme and a transparent programme.” Mr English said he would treat Labour’s tax cuts which came into force the next day as the “first tranche in our tax-cut programme. That will be followed by another tranche of tax reductions on April 1 2009 and further tranches in 2010 and 2011.” 
I want to know whether Mr English advised John Key to sign a personal guarantee knowing full well that we were heading into a major economic recession. I suspect given the huge smile and the laughter on the lips of the Minister of Finance when he was reading out the announcement on the cycleway budget that there was not a personal commitment to that particular policy from the Minister of Finance. I wonder whether the Minister of Finance has set up the Prime Minister of New Zealand with this personal guarantee because it will come back to haunt him over and over again. 
National members have proved that they were really prepared to say anything to get elected and then act surprised as if they had not noticed that there was an impending financial crisis. That is the issue I am deeply concerned about. I will comment further about what Mr Key went on to say about the tax cuts. He was contrasting what he believed to be the position the Labour Government would take if we had been re-elected at the previous election. He went on to say: “unlike Labour we won’t cancel our tax cuts”. Is there any leeway on that? Let me just read that statement and let us just see whether anyone can read any words of doubt into it. He said: “unlike Labour we won’t cancel our tax cuts”. I think that is pretty clear-cut. 
He went on further in his Budget speech last year and said that New Zealanders really could rely on and trust the National Party’s tax cuts. He said: “Most of all New Zealanders will be able to believe our tax cuts they will be able to trust our tax cuts … You see we believe in tax cuts we believe in the power of tax cuts and we will deliver them. What is more we can afford to do it.” Well I am afraid that every single statement that John Key has made and his personal guarantee have proved to be completely and utterly out of sync with the legislation we are now debating in this House. 
The Taxation (Budget Tax Measures) Bill undoes the second and third series of tax cuts scheduled for 1 April 2010 and 1 April 2011. We knew that the tax cuts National was promising were unaffordable and we said so. We took a responsible approach with our policies. We pulled back on policies that we wished to announce as part of Labour’s election campaign as we decided that we did not want to misrepresent the situation to the people of New Zealand. 
As my colleague Clayton Cosgrove said we will be supporting this bill because we never believed that National’s tax cuts were going to proceed. We knew they were unaffordable. More important we always knew that National’s tax cuts were inequitable. I remind the people of New Zealand—most of whom are probably tuned in as we speak listening to this important debate—that 30 percent of the last round of tax cuts on 1 April this year went to 3 percent of the top income earners. 
Stuart Nash 
: Disgraceful! 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: That is disgraceful. I totally agree with my colleague behind me who intervened; they are utterly and completely unaffordable. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: What’s his name? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: That member knows perfectly well who he is. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: No we don’t nor does New Zealand. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: Well if that member would like me to give Mr Nash a complete free hit here then that is fine. Clayton Cosgrove was making the point that it is shameful the National Party’s focus was always on delivering tax cuts to high earners but that would have the least impact on stimulating the economy something that National promised. We all know that it would be much better to focus those tax cuts at the bottom end where people are spending every cent they have. 
The other thing that is mentioned in this legislation is the reminder we have of the major changes that the previous Government made to our investment and savings environment with the Cullen superannuation fund and KiwiSaver. There is an absolute reneging on those and it is a reminder that the crucial research and development tax credits we had in place for investing in export industries have been completely gutted by this Government. 
It is really hard to give this Budget a name. One of the bloggers today came up with “Dark Grey Budget”. It is not really a “Black Budget” but it has not got very far. 
Iain Lees-Galloway 
: Looming. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: The “Looming Clouds Budget”—but there ain’t no silver lining in this Budget and that is one of the problems. I personally think that this is a Budget that represents a complete waste of opportunity and this particular measure we are debating proves that.