Macindoe Tim: Budget Debate 
Macindoe Tim: Budget Debate 
[Volume:664;Page:11697] 
TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West) 
: 
 As the debate on this year’s excellent Budget draws to a conclusion it is interesting to reflect on the fundamental differences evident in philosophy and economic understanding that the contributions of Government and Opposition members have revealed. Where Government members have championed aspiration members opposite have championed envy. Where Government members have demonstrated their determination to assist New Zealanders to gain extra rewards for honest endeavour and to improve their lot in life members opposite have resisted the measures that have been so widely and so warmly welcomed by people—including many of their own supporters—preferring to ignore the fact the indisputable fact that this Budget leaves the vast majority of New Zealanders significantly better off. 
Where Government members have focused on achieving economic growth creating a fairer tax system and encouraging research investment in jobs and household savings members opposite have argued for more of their failed policies of the past 9 years which saw Government spending lurch out of control and the best economic circumstances of a generation squandered. In short where Government members have focused on the needs and the goals of the many members opposite have contrived to manufacture problems for the few. 
Hon David Parker 
: How can you say that with 30 percent of your tax cuts for the top 5 percent? 
TIM MACINDOE 
: Opposition members’ hearts have not been in it in this debate I tell Mr Parker. Their heads certainly have not been anywhere near it and most of the members opposite have been going through the motions in this debate to offer some form of opposition merely for the sake of opposition. But in their hearts they know that the changes that this Government is making are the right ones and that Budget 2010 is one of the most significant and impressive documents of its type to have been delivered to the House in my lifetime. That is why I will be proud to cast my vote in support of the Budget at the end of this debate— 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: Oh a difficult decision for us! 
TIM MACINDOE 
: —and it is why I have been proud to publicise and discuss the measures I tell Mr Hughes that it outlines in my electorate of Hamilton West. Like most people in Hamilton I want our schools and health system to be generously funded along with other essential social services. I share the hopes of many for higher living standards and fairness in our tax system. I am strongly motivated in my political career to create the conditions in our society and economy that will encourage my children and all young New Zealanders to see their long-term future here in New Zealand. To achieve that we must face up to some major challenges. 
In recent times we have been falling further and further behind with the result that all decisions must be made in the context of some grim realities. Members opposite consistently ignore the disastrous legacy that they bequeathed to the incoming National-led Government at the end of Labour’s irresponsible 9 years in office. The global downturn certainly threw the problems into sharp focus and made things worse. But the previous Government cannot avoid responsibility for the serious and prolonged deficits that the new Government inherited and that all New Zealanders are now burdened by and paying for as a result of Labour’s reckless mismanagement of the economy. 
Hon David Parker 
: Then why did you cut taxes? If the deficit is a problem why did you cut taxes? 
TIM MACINDOE 
: For a country of 4.3 million people I tell Mr Parker to be forced to borrow $240 million a week just to meet existing expenditure commitments is a disgrace and it is Labour’s disgrace. That outrage was directly caused by Labour. That burden translates to approximately $12 billion per year without the new Government having the luxury of funding many of the significant new proposals that we would fund given better circumstances. As Bill English has said Governments that operate heavy deficits do not have choices. 
Yet not one member opposite has apologised during this debate for Labour’s reckless adherence to the ostrich economic philosophy that was the trademark of the Clark-Cullen Labour Government. For 9 years while Labour was in Government members opposite buried their heads in the sand as talented New Zealanders departed our shores in droves in search of better conditions and a fairer tax system. Those members kept their heads in the sand as bureaucracy exploded and as essential public services came under increasing pressure. They shoved their heads and long necks deep down the hole as Government expenditure increased at twice the rate of revenue for 5 years—a shameful record that seriously undermined our international credit rating at a time of huge danger in global markets. 
Had the voters of New Zealand not rightly thrown Labour out of office so decisively at the 2008 general election we might now be facing a fiscal disaster akin to those we are witnessing in parts of Europe and elsewhere right now. No household can spend twice what it earns; to do so leads to harmful deprivation of basic necessities and mortgagee sales. No business can spend twice what it earns and remain sustainable in the long term. To do so leads to redundancies and business failures and the debts often knock over others as well. And no Government can spend twice what it earns without leaving an unfair and unmanageable burden for future generations. 
With that sort of reckless stewardship from the previous Government is it any wonder that under Labour New Zealanders saved less and borrowed more? That is why I am proud of the leadership that Bill English John Key and the current Government have shown to steer the good ship “ 
New Zealand 
” through the stormy waters that our economy has faced since we came into office—though we must not underestimate the challenges still to be overcome. We are sailing into calmer waters and our new crew has the vision the skills and the determination to make the most of the conditions ahead. 
That is why I am particularly proud of the good sense and imagination that the Minister of Finance has demonstrated in Budget 2010. The public agree the media agree my constituents in Hamilton West certainly agree and as the polls confirm even most of the dwindling bunch who call themselves Labour supporters agree. As previous Government speakers have noted first and foremost this Budget is about getting faster and sustainable economic growth. That is the most important thing we can and must aspire to because it is the only way we can secure the higher-paying jobs and opportunities that hard-working New Zealanders demand and deserve. 
One important ingredient in the mix is the significant change we have made to personal and company income tax rates to incentivise and reward honest effort. Throughout this debate and again tonight we have heard Labour members bleat their tired refrain of “tax cuts for the rich” because that is what they were determined to do before the Budget was even delivered and they lacked both the wit and the integrity to acknowledge that the Budget was not what they had been expecting. Without a shadow of doubt the new tax rates are great for those on modest and fixed incomes. My constituents in Hamilton think it is great that two-thirds of the cost of personal income tax cuts have gone towards reducing the bottom two rates; in other words taking the current 12.5 percent rate down to 10.5 percent and taking the 21 percent rate down to 17.5 percent. It is a fact that two-thirds of the tax cuts apply to people on incomes below $48000. If that is tax cuts for the rich then Labour members have even lower aspirations than I have previously given them credit for. 
As my colleague Jonathan Young noted a few moments ago 73 percent of income earners will now face a statutory income tax rate of just 17.5 percent or less. For those who are near the top of that income range that tax is almost halved down from 33 percent in just 2 years. Let us not forget that significant provision has been made for superannuitants and beneficiaries. If that is tax cuts for the rich then the people of Hamilton say “bring it on”. The  
Dominion Post 
 editorial hit the mark when it described the Budget as “a coherent document that should encourage saving and investment and discourage consumption and speculative investment in property.” 
Yet Labour would like to scare people into thinking they will be worse off as a result of the Budget package so let us compare the records of the two previous Governments. Under 9 years of National up to the change of Government in 1999 the food price index increased by just 9.9 percent. Under the following 9 years of Labour it shot up a massive 37.1 percent. So it is more than a bit rich for Labour MPs to shed crocodile tears about the impact that increased prices will have on families when their record was such a disaster. Let us look at health: the previous Labour administration left the incoming National Government with around $160 million worth of unfunded services to fill and quietly stripped $150 million out of Vote Health before the last general election. It cut 30000 people from hospital waiting lists. In its latter years it increased funding certainly but at the same time somehow managed to decrease health services and access to essential treatments and pharmaceuticals. 
This is not just a Budget for challenging times and it is not a Budget for the few. It certainly is not a Budget that continues the failed ostrich economic policies of 1999 to 2008. This is a Budget that will attract back home talented New Zealanders. It will provide the right incentives fairer rewards and significant growth so I say “Well done!” to Bill English and “Well done!” to the support partners in our Government. Thanks to their efforts soon we will be saying “Well done New Zealand!”. This is an excellent Budget.