Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 08 April 2014. Volume:697;Page:16951. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]7.Hon DAVID PARKER (Deputy Leader—Labour)to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with the Infometrics estimate that the 1974 Super Fund would have savings of $278 billion if it had not been axed by the National Government and does he agree wages would be higher in New Zealand if we had those higher savings?Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance):No but it is good to see that the member has gone from relitigating the 2005 election to now relitigating the 1975 election because actually it was voters who knocked that scheme on the head.Hon David Parker: Does he accept that Australia’s successful universal workplace savings scheme introduced a decade after National axed ours is why Australia owns its banks and ours and why Australians have higher wages?Hon BILL ENGLISH: No but I do know that two of the effects of it in Australia are that Australians have less money invested in businesses than New Zealanders—Grant Robertson: Rubbish!Hon BILL ENGLISH: —no it is true—and its rise in household debt directly parallels its rise in nominal household savings. But if the member believes he wants the Australian system he should be open with the New Zealand public that he is going to strictly means test national superannuation. There is nowhere in the world that has compulsory superannuation and universal national superannuation.Hon David Parker: Will the Minister now admit that National was wrong to vote against KiwiSaver which it now supports and to call the Cullen fund which it now supports a dog?Hon BILL ENGLISH: No but if the member is going to advocate what he calls universal but is actually compulsory superannuation he needs to explain what impact that will have on New Zealand superannuation. I think those who have been in this Parliament for a while will recognise that we have spent—what—20 years in vigorous discussion over the nature of national superannuation. It ended up universal because that is what the public wanted and Labour is now advocating the Australian scheme which involves strict income testing of national superannuation. I invite the member to announce that at the next Grey Power meeting he goes to.Hon David Parker: Is the Minister able to table any document from the Labour Party supporting his last lie?Mr SPEAKER: No—there is no ministerial responsibility at all for that.Hon David Parker: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister was allowed to get away with misrepresenting Labour policy—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Now the member is using the point of order system to debate an answer that has been given. The member should use an appropriate supplementary question.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I do want to ask you how therefore it was possible that the Minister’s answer was in order. The Minister gave his answer and as is allowed under the Standing Orders Mr Parker then asked a supplementary question based on that answer. That is within the Standing Orders if the answer was in order which you appeared to rule it was so I cannot see why it would not be in order for Mr Parker to ask that kind of question.Mr SPEAKER: The question that was asked from Mr Parker to the Minister was quite in order. It effectively was “Will the Minister now admit that National was wrong?” and the Minister answered it very quickly by saying no he will not admit that. The member David Parker has now asked whether the Minister is prepared to table some Labour Party documentation. If the member wants that question ruled in order to settle the House down I will allow that question to stand but if the member gets a very political answer back he should not come back to me.Hon David Parker: Is the Minister able to table any document that he has received that proves the assertion he made in his last answer which was that the Labour Party is moving to a means-based superannuation when that in fact is not our policy?Mr SPEAKER: Order! It is quite a different question but carry on.Hon BILL ENGLISH: If I could find a coherent rational sensible Labour Party document on this matter I would table it. But I cannot so I will table the results of the 1975 and 2008 elections where these issues were litigated.