Chadwick Steve: KiwiSaver Bill — In Committee 
Chadwick Steve: KiwiSaver Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:633;Page:4931] 
STEVE CHADWICK (Labour—Rotorua) 
: 
 I move  
That the question be now put 
. 
BRIAN CONNELL (National—Rakaia) 
: 
 Thank you for the call on Part 3. I start by saying that Lianne Dalziel and Doug Woolerton have both lamented the fact that we do not have a savings culture in New Zealand society. I say to them that is why I was such a strong supporter of Lianne Dalziel’s speech when she told us about her savings scheme for her skates. That was the savings culture this country had—and Doug Woolerton knows that. If we work hard and put a bit of money aside we save. But the point is that it is called personal responsibility. That is what is lacking at the moment—personal responsibility. 
Some members of the Government know about that. Taito Phillip Field understands personal responsibility. He understands savings schemes. He is working towards his own benefit. He is working hard and he is making sure that every bit of money that comes into his electorate office goes into his savings scheme. I tell members that Taito Phillip Field is doing his bit for international relationships as well by trying to send some of our money and hard-working labourers off to Samoa. And do people know what? There are members of the Government who have actually taken the time to go to Samoa to see that savings scheme in action. I have to say that it is a first-class scheme—if one is a rogue. 
But I tell people that other members of the Government think that savings scheme is pretty good as well because they have an adjunct to it. Rather than wasting the Labour Party’s own money on electioneering they decided to save it $886000 by spending taxpayers’ money on its electioneering. So I tell people that those guys have worked out personal responsibility—when it suits their own purposes. 
I now turn to clause 55 “Contribution rate”. In particular I will look at subclause (1)(a) which states that 4 percent of employees’ gross salary or wages can be used for contributions. I ask my colleagues to keep that figure in their minds and to overlay that fact with this: when we talk about mortgage contribution rates or diversions those are capped at 2 percent. If we contribute 4 percent we are allowed to use 2 percent with the exception that we are only allowed to use 50 percent of that amount. So the mortgage diversion component is only 1 percent. Doug Woolerton knows that a 1 percent diversion into anything is hardly a workable figure. I mean that is about the support that New Zealand First has. He knows that is not critical mass and that it simply will not work. 
There is more of an inherent contradiction in the Government’s position and it is this: was 2 percent not rejected by the Government as the entry level into the scheme? Jeanette Fitzsimons has picked that up. She has put an amendment before the Committee for consideration and the National Party is thinking long and hard about supporting that amendment. But the Government said that 2 percent would not provide enough money to develop a savings culture in this country. That of course contradicts the very thing the Government is setting out to do under this legislation which is to create a savings culture. But Government members just do not see the inherent contradiction. 
Still Doug Woolerton maintains that members of the National Party do not get savings cultures. Well I say to that member there are members in this party who have developed their wealth by working hard and saving hard—by taking that 40c an hour and turning it into good money by the sweat of their brow—and we do not want to see that culture undermined by the Government’s putting in place a savings scheme that simply will not work. 
Michael Cullen knows that KiwiSaver is flawed. When he ran off and did his deal with Mr Copeland he overlooked the fact that in his haste to put together a 2 percent cap on mortgage diversions he badly undermined his own policy.