Burns Brendon: Taxation (Canterbury Earthquake Measures) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Burns Brendon: Taxation (Canterbury Earthquake Measures) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:672;Page:19034] 
BRENDON BURNS (Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 I will continue in the bipartisan spirit that has been displayed by this House; I think it is truly appropriate. I thank my colleague Stuart Nash for his fulsome acknowledgment of the role that I played but I also acknowledge all of the Canterbury MPs on both sides of the House and our Green colleague Kennedy Graham for the work that they have done and Rahui Katene too for her work on behalf of the Te Tai Tonga electorate and the Maori community in Christchurch. I think we have served our communities well through what has been the most extraordinarily difficult time. Of course we are not out of the woods yet. Obviously the winter is upon us and that will present its own challenges to us as a city but Parliament has shown that at times like this we can come together in the best interests of our communities. 
To give an example—picking up on the comments of the member for Hamilton East—on Monday night a exhibition opened in Hamilton of photographs taken by Fairfax photographers including some from the  
Waikato Times 
 photographers who came down to cover the enormous event of 22 February and its aftermath. One of those photographers is a chap called Chris Hillock a very fine and award-winning photographer for the  
Waikato Times 
. His mother Maggie Hillock who happens to be my campaign manager suggested the idea of having a photo exhibition which was backed by the  
Waikato Times 
—by Fairfax. Again in a bipartisan spirit I note that even though the exhibition was suggested by a Labour member and organised by the former MP for Hamilton East when the photograph from the exhibition appeared it was of the current MP for Hamilton West. It is a good example of the bipartisan spirit that is serving Canterbury well at this time. Of course over the weekend we will also see a huge global telethon supported by Maori Television in order to raise funds for our city and region in the wake of the enormous disaster of 22 February. 
The Taxation (Canterbury Earthquake Measures) Bill is a measure that assists in respect of donations that have been made by employers to their employees in the wake of the quake so that those donations do not affect the employees’ eligibility for Working for Families and other benefits. The amount that Working for Families pays in the Canterbury region is in the order of $300 million a year. Those payments are very welcome and they are enormously important to the more beleaguered communities although the payments were spread across the income spectrum. Some of those who have benefited most from Working for Families are in the hard-hit eastern suburbs of Christchurch including in parts of my electorate in Avonside and Richmond. This bill means that those employees will not have their eligibility for Working for Families payments affected by payments that employers might have given them in the wake of 22 February. That is very welcome. 
I also acknowledge the extraordinary outpouring of donations from the business community in the wake of the 22 February earthquake. I made it a practice on an almost daily basis from about day three or four in to go to the civil defence headquarters open the boot of my red beetle and fill it with goods that had been donated by companies from the length and breadth of New Zealand and in fact from further afield. I know that amongst the consignments I put into my boot was Australian-made Banana Boat sun cream and it was very welcome. The weather was still hot and people obviously were sometimes choosing to spend a lot a time outdoors because of the damage to their homes and businesses so that sunscreen was amongst the goods I took on a daily basis to the community groups trusts and organisations that were helping people. 
Torches had been donated there were batteries and there was water by the pallet-load because large parts of the city lost potable water for some days after the quake. There was flyspray which was quite useful for some households and a great quantity of rubber gloves and face masks. I have to confess that I still have some rubber gloves and face masks in the garage at home and I hope that they might be useful at some other point. I did not know quite who to give them back to once the need had passed but I guess they might be of some use later in the year if we have an outbreak of flu or anything similar. 
Those things were donated generously by businesses across New Zealand. This bill is in part making sure that those businesses will not have to pay tax on the goods they have donated to people affected by the quake. It is another indication of the national response. We have felt enormously heartened. It goes on. As I mentioned there was the photo exhibition opened as recently as Monday night of this week and an appeal to raise funds for the people of Canterbury will be launched this weekend on Maori Television with global support. Thinking of the comments made by a colleague from the Taranaki - King Country electorate earlier in the House during the debate on a previous bill I acknowledge the role Fonterra is playing in supporting that enormous fund-raising initiative. 
The only disquiet I would express about this bill is its timing. As we have seen a regulatory impact statement was prepared by Inland Revenue Department officials. I note that they concluded the statement and submitted it to Cabinet on 17 March—St Patrick’s Day if you like—3 weeks after the quake yet the bill was introduced on 4 May some 7 weeks later. I suggest that the lead time indicates that it might have provided the opportunity for us to scrutinise the legislation which is what we in this House would have preferred. With all due respect to the officials issues can often be picked up by the combined intelligence that comes through having the select committee process and having public input into it. It is really the best way through. 
A pattern is emerging here. I note that a Canterbury ram should be a sheep or a sports team; it should not be a Government habit in respect of legislation introduced to the House. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: There’s a few old wethers over there; a few two-tooths. 
BRENDON BURNS 
: Despite the temptation and the presence of some members opposite from rural electorates I will not pick up on the sheep analogies that my colleague the member for Waimakariri is starting to develop. I make the point again to the Government while trying to respect the bipartisan nature of the bill that where it is at all possible there should only be compelling circumstances in which legislation is not subject to the scrutiny of a select committee. The select committee process truly adds to our knowledge and to the rigour of the bill. It also means that we avoid two things. Firstly it avoids the prospect of Parliament having to come back to legislation because it was pushed through under urgency without any consideration. That is the process; that is what we should be following. Secondly it also means that the fish-hooks in the legislation can be picked up there and then. Those are the benefits of the select committee process. 
As Labour members have made clear we are keen to see the Taxation (Canterbury Earthquake Measures) Bill progressed. We will support it through all its stages. We have some concerns about the urgency that is being applied but this bill makes absolute sense for Canterbury at this time. Canterbury is still very much a community in need. We acknowledge that other Budget measures have provided the funding to pay for 60 percent of the restoration of Canterbury’s infrastructure. That has come through in earlier legislation than the Budget. This bill is an accompanying measure if you like. We are still nowhere near to being out of the woods in respect of the challenges we face as a community and as a city and a province and we will need every ongoing effort. 
One of the things that I think we need to do if we are to use urgency is to connect it to the rebuild of Christchurch. My colleague Stuart Nash mentioned the Napier example. On a final comment and note Napier rebuilt its central business district in 2 years flat—2 years flat—from absolute desolation. Everything was razed by the fire that followed the quake. Napier had an interim “tin town” where the commercial businesses were able to operate. That was a fantastic initiative. More building was done in Napier in those 2 years than in the whole of the rest of New Zealand. We need a sense of urgency not in the sense of a bill being pushed through the House under urgency but in the sense of the rebuild of Christchurch. I ask members to give their support to that urgency in respect of Christchurch’s future.