Hipkins Chris: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Hipkins Chris: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:5991] 
CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) 
: 
 I am still reeling somewhat from the lecture given just before by the Minister in the chair the Hon Peter Dunne on correct parliamentary process. I note that in the Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill there is no minority report despite the fact that there appears to be some disagreement on aspects of the bill across the House. I wonder whether that is because the minority report was removed in between the committee deliberating on the bill and it being reported to the House. 
Craig Foss 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. We are in the Committee stage. We are talking on Part 1 not the commentary on the bill. I know there will be introductory remarks but I wonder whether the member could move back to Part 1. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: No the commentary is part of a general discussion. 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: For the member’s benefit I say that the commentary is on the entire bill including Part 1. 
There is no mention of a minority report within the commentary which covers Part 1 so I wonder whether a minority report was actually written. It could be that there was not a minority report or it could now be part of the practice of this House for the minority report to be removed between when the committee deliberates on the report and when it is tabled in the House. That appears to be correct parliamentary practice for this National Government as revealed in the House at question time this afternoon. 
This bill makes amendments to the Income Tax Act 2007 and as my colleague David Cunliffe pointed out earlier the Labour members are very concerned at the rushed nature of this bill. As we know from past experience rushed taxation bills in this House make for bad legislation which we quite often have to come back to and correct later on. When was the last time Parliament rushed through significant changes to the Income Tax Act 2007? I believe we will find that it was in December of last year when the National Government implemented its tax cuts promises which was its core election promise. Yet we found ourselves back in the House under urgency after having rushed those changes through in December prior to Christmas. Fewer than 6 months later we are rushing through a repeal. This highlights the fact that when taxation matters are rushed members end up with egg on their faces such as some of the National members who had quite a lot to say on income tax prior to Christmas when they were rushing through another taxation bill under urgency. National was trying to build trust with New Zealanders by implementing its core election promise of personal income tax cuts. Did National deliver on that promise? No it did not because having rushed the tax cuts through under urgency it then cancelled them 6 months later. 
National has very little credibility when it comes to taxation matters. We know that it simply breaks all of its promises and that is why it is all the more concerning that this bill is being rushed through the House. It has not been given proper consideration and we are concerned about that. It is somewhat humiliating for National members opposite when they have to come back to the House and correct mistakes that they have made on taxation legislation. As David Bennett said one cannot say yes to tax cuts before an election and then say no to them after an election. Yet that is exactly what National did. It made tax cuts the core part of its election manifesto and then it took them away again within 6 months. The National Government broke its promise because it does not believe in keeping its word to New Zealanders. Time after time we are seeing National breaking its promises. I think we are up to four out of 10 promises on the pledge card that have now been broken and I am in no doubt that there is more to come. 
It looks like the chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee Craig Foss will take the next call on this bill and I certainly hope he does so. I hope he canvasses for us whether there was a minority report and if there was one whether it somehow fell out between the select committee’s deliberation and the bill being reported back to the House. I wonder whether the member has any observations on whether he thinks that would be appropriate. Other chairpeople of select committees seem to think that that is appropriate. I do not think that is appropriate and the Labour members do not think that is appropriate. We think that after a committee has deliberated on a bill the chairperson of that committee should report the bill back to the House as it was deliberated on. 
To come back to the intent of the bill I say that it provides for the reform of international tax rules it aligns life insurance taxation rules more closely with the accounting treatment of life insurance profits and at the same time it extends portfolio investment entity rules—