Smith Nick: Budget DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSmith Nick: Budget Debate[Sitting date: 26 May 2015. Volume:705;Page:3951. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment): It is great to be participating in this Budget debate and to be part of a Government that is getting on and addressing the issues that are important for New Zealanders. And it is even more of a special privilege to be following Mr Grant Robertson. I have got a simple challenge for Mr Robertson: tell me a single economic statistic that today is not better than when we became the Government. Let us go through the list. How about we take—Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Oh an interruption.Grant Robertson: I would like to respond to Dr Smith’s question. We can start with debt—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): No be seated. You cannot do that.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Let us look at inflation. At 0.1 percent it is the lowest figure in over 17 years. Let us look at job growth. We have a Budget with 150000 new jobs over the next 3 years. Unemployment has come down from 5.8 percent to 4.5 percent over the Budget period. Let us look at interest rates. When we came into Government they were 11 percent. Today they are about 5.5 percent and that matters for businesses that are creating jobs and that matters to New Zealanders wanting to own their own home.A Budget is about making choices and this Government is making choices to back children who are in hardship and we say that that is the right response for New Zealand at this time. This is a Budget that puts more money into important services like health and education whether it be for cancer treatment or improving educational standards in early childhood centres in our schools and in our tertiary institutions.I was appalled—appalled—to hear Mr Grant Robertson say that there was nothing in this Budget for the regions. Well let us do a test. For most of us who represent regions—and there is a good number of those members in the House today—we know that irrigation offers opportunities for areas like that of my colleague the MP for Kaikōura in Hurunui and for my area on the Waimea Plains. And what has the Labour Party said about irrigation? Every step of the way it has opposed the Government providing support for rural communities to grow their irrigation and it has opposed the reforms to the Resource Management Act that will enable those irrigation schemes to come on stream. Was it not interesting listening to the Mayor of Westport? If there was ever a region that was in difficulty it is that one. What did the Mayor of Westport say was the most important thing for his community in Buller? It was increased communications broadband and cellphone services which we provided for in this Budget and members opposite had the audacity to vote against the bill that would enable us to deliver for a community that is having a difficult time.The part that I just find so shallow about Opposition contributions to this Budget debate is that those members complain that there is not enough money for this that and everything. The Labour members oppose any steps in the Budget to generate additional revenue and then they whinge about the surplus. Those members obviously did not get to year 1 mathematics and learn how a Budget makes up those choices. Then we had the clangers—the clangers—from Andrew Little. The big priority for Labour—the issue that has got to make the difference—is gender reassignment surgery. I do not know about my colleagues on this side of the House but all the time we get bailed up in the corner and asked: “What’s the Government doing about gender reassignment surgery.”! That is the No. 1 priority for members opposite and they wonder why they are down in the polls.But the clanger—the real clanger—for Labour came the day after the Budget. Those members will look back on the career of Mr Little and identify his post-Budget speech as the beginning of the end for his period as leader. With just a few words he has undermined the security of 600000 retirees in our country. Let me quote what he said: “I cannot commit to New Zealand superannuation being universal.” That is word for word what he said. Does Jacinda Ardern agree with Mr Little’s statement? Does Annette King agree with their leader’s statement? As the Prime Minister said there are only three options for Labour in respect of its statements about superannuation: is it going to raise the age is it going to means test or is it going to reduce the level of the entitlement? I challenge the next member from Labour on their feet to give back to those New Zealand superannuitants some idea of what their entitlements are to be if we are to ever have a Labour Government again. I had a call from my electorate chairman at the weekend. He said that with Mr Little’s comments on superannuation he was feeling more optimistic than ever about National’s prospects of winning a fourth term.Let me come to the issue of good fiscal management. Let me give the numbers. Five Budgets ago there was a deficit of $18 billion. In the Budget after that Bill English got it down to $9 billion. In the Budget after that it was down to $5 billion. In the one after that it was down to $3 billion and the latest estimate for this year is for a deficit of only $0.6 billion or 1.3 percent of Government expenditure.Last week I tried to table in Parliament the official figures from the Parliamentary Library on the record of different Governments in terms of comparing their Budgets with the actual results. I am not surprised that the Labour Party objected to the document being tabled. So let me explain to the House what it says. How accurate was the previous Labour Government in its predictions of surpluses and deficits? Well the numbers are that over its nine Budgets it was on average out by 4 percent. Well Mr English was out by 1.4 percent. If we take the very last Labour Budget Labour members stood on their feet and promised a surplus of $1.3 billion. Do you know what we actually got? We got a deficit of $3.9 billion. Labour was out by $5 billion. How dare members opposite get to their feet and criticise Bill English our Minister of Finance for being out by only 1 percent? They know in their hearts that this is a good outcome.Let us talk about some of the initiatives and the way in which they benefit my own home community in Nelson. This Budget means $4 million more going to the families on the lowest incomes in my Nelson constituency. There are 1300 people on benefits in Nelson who are going to benefit by $25 per week. There are another 2200 families on low incomes in my electorate who are going to benefit by $25 per week.Hon Annette King: When?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: There are 6000 children in the lowest-income families in my electorate who are going to benefit from this Budget. The member asks when. I say to the member that it is 43 years since a Government increased the base level of benefits and I am proud to be part of a National Government that has delivered it and delivered alongside it increasing—[Interruption]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!Hon Dr NICK SMITH: —requirements for work and alongside that this Budget provides for 150000 additional jobs over coming years. There have been comments about levies. [Interruption]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Take a breath.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Let me give an example of one. This Budget provides for a $200 per car reduction in ACC levies—a $200 reduction in ACC levies.Hon Trevor Mallard: Who put them up?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: That is a good question. Mr Mallard asks who put them up. I will tell you who. In July 2008 the Labour Government put the ACC levy on cars up by 50 bucks and we are a Government that is reducing it by $200 per car and that will be welcome relief for the 2.4 million car owners across our country.I could talk of the very constructive measures in this Budget to improve New Zealand’s management of water and to improve our management of the Resource Management Act. I could talk at length about so many initiatives in this Budget that provide for the issues that matter to New Zealand and that is why members on this side of the House have been so strongly supporting the best Budget I have seen in my 25-year career.