Dunne Peter: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Dunne Peter: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:6000] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue) 
: 
 Can I just say that it is this Government’s long-term objective—or medium-term objective actually—to bring down the top personal tax rate to 30c so that it aligns with the portfolio investment entity rate. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I think it was medium now it’s long. 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: No I can assure the member that it is a medium-term objective. 
Just as we bring the debate on this part to a close I will come back to Mr Burns’ speech and his proposed amendments regarding the Screen Production Incentive Fund. I need to advise the Committee at the outset that the Government will not be supporting the amendments. In fact we do not think they are in order in terms of Standing Order 320. The amendments were not lodged within the prescribed period of time and they have an impact on the fiscal aggregates. 
But beyond that I say to the member that the issue he raises is somewhat ironic given that the policy being implemented here was the policy of the previous Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage the Rt Hon Helen Clark. I appreciate that some things have changed; we on this side of the Chamber are simply being the faithful adherents of her policy and it is ironic that her own party wants to change it. Be that as it may let me say to the member that the issues he raised with me and my officials in recent days do warrant consideration. I do not believe that his amendments address the points satisfactorily and that is why and for other reasons we are not supporting them. 
I am prepared to look at the issue in the context of the current tax bill that the Finance and Expenditure Committee has before it and if we come to the conclusion that an amendment along the lines the member is proposing is desirable then I am prepared to address it in the context of that bill. The point at this stage is that his objectives are not achieved by his amendments in our view and in any case they do not quite meet the parameters of the Standing Orders. 
Beyond that I simply acknowledge the contribution of members to the debate on this part. There have been some useful contributions from members from both sides of the Chamber and I concur wholeheartedly with their accolades towards the officials who serviced the committee including the independent adviser the independent drafting adviser and the officials from the Inland Revenue Department who have lived with this legislation far longer than any of us and who know its intricacies far better than any of us. They are a dedicated bunch of people. They work very very hard and they work without fear or favour to develop the best tax law for this country. 
I must come back to one point as I conclude. I cannot resist a final retort on the subject of rushed legislation. I am tempted to say that if members want to talk about rushed legislation I can give them an example of it. I see my honourable friend Sir Roger Douglas at the back of the Chamber. I recall coming into this House on Budget night in 1984 when at 7.30 p.m. I think Sir Roger introduced his Budget. By the time the Budget-related urgency associated with passing the legislation on tax and other matters was over it was some time on Saturday afternoon and in those days we sat day and night. Members may like to draw some comparisons. 
This taxation bill came in over a year ago. It has been before a select committee this new select committee for most of this year. The Government did not put a report-back date upon it. Members dealt with it at their own pace. They dealt with it efficiently and speedily. Yes it is a big bill and I have conceded at other times that we will not repeat the experience—we will not have a bill of this size in the future—but I do not think that any reasonable assessment can say that this process has been rushed. 
Other members have referred to the fact that a number of the issues in the bill have been around for consultation since 2006 or earlier in some cases. By my feeble mind that is at least 3 years if not 4 years. Most of the stakeholders have been well and truly consulted. In fact the message I have been getting from people is not that this legislation is rushed but they have been asking when on earth the Government will pass it. They want to know when its provisions will be put into effect. People in insurance people who are affected by the international tax regime and people who are affected by the charitable tax changes all want to see the benefit delivered. That is what we are about doing right now and I acknowledge the contribution that members are making towards that but I will not accept the allegation that this is rushed legislation. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Amendments in the name of Brendon Burns have been tabled. These amendments are out of order as 24 hours’ notice has not been given. We now move to the Minister’s amendments—