Cosgrove Clayton: Budget Debate 
Cosgrove Clayton: Budget Debate 
[Volume:639;Page:9517] 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Associate Minister of Finance) 
: 
 What a rooster! That member asked a question and I am happy to answer. He asked why the Labour Government can give a $2.1 billion corporate tax cut—which he voted against but forgot to remind everybody about. He has been wandering around Wellington—he does not go to his electorate—telling everybody and trying to explain to his business mates why he voted against a 3 percent reduction in the corporate tax rate. The question he asked was how the Labour Government can give a $2.1 billion tax cut and not slash and burn public services and how it can say that National will give a tax cut but will slash and burn public services. That is basically what he said. Well I will enlighten that economic genius who could not do the numbers to save his own backside on the back of his hand. It goes like this: $2.1 billion versus $7.4 billion of tax cuts half of it based on borrowing. That is the difference. 
Darren Hughes 
: He is off now. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Oh yes! “Scuttle away!” I say to him. Scuttle away like the turtle that he is. I say to him— 
Hon Bill English 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: He does not like it. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: There will be silence during points of order. 
Hon Bill English 
: The member might get his ideas about what to say in Parliament by looking in the mirror in the morning but he has broken the Standing Orders in two respects. He is not allowed to refer to the absence or presence of members in the House. His second remark which was inspired while he was having a shave is simply offensive. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: The member knows that he is not allowed to refer to absence but I did not quite take it as that. I could ask the member to withdraw that remark. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I withdraw. The difference is $7.4 billion half of it based on borrowing against $2.1 billion of real money with all the social and economic infrastructure centred around it. He told us today that not only will he cut personal tax and corporate tax—although he did not say by how much or whether the $7.4 billion policy that he campaigned on is on the books—and give a massive corporate and personal tax cut but also he will keep all the popular policies of this Government and all the costs that go with them in this expenditure and will lump on every spending commitment that his colleagues have made to date and beyond. That is what he said. 
There are two reasons why we can still say that if the National Party gets into office it will slice slash and burn public servants—from nurses to teachers to police to doctors to hospitals. The first reason is that his economics do not add up and he proved it today; and the second reason is this wonderful thing called history. I say that actions speak louder than words and that goes for both sides. We have a Government on this side that has put a Budget on the Table—KiwiSaver tax cuts more money for health more money to back our businesses research and development write-offs more write-offs for charity all costed all done. Seven years of Budgets prove that. Then we have that member and his crew over there who have to go to the country with a legacy of what they did and what they did not do. 
 And what did they do that they are so proud of? They are proud as my colleague Trevor Mallard said that when Nick Smith was in Cabinet he oversaw the biggest cut in defence spending history—10 percent. When Nick Smith was in Cabinet and as a backbencher he oversaw the biggest slash and burn made to the superannuation system in the history of this country when National cut superannuation three times—and Nick Smith sits and pontificates. That is part of the history those members have to live up to. 
Bill English cannot add up. Bill English thinks that everybody out in the marketplace and in the community is silly. Gerry Brownlee once said a profound thing on radio—I know that that is rare but it is true. I was on the ZB network with him on a show called  
Yardley 
. He said some years ago that people do not understand Budgets. I looked him in the eye and said: “Gerry if any Kiwis out there can balance their grocery bill and their housekeeping bill and make ends meet then in my view they have a PhD in economics. They do understand budgets; it is called the family budget.” But of course this crew on the Opposition benches—the stunned mullets over there—say arrogantly that people do not understand and they think they can hoodwink the people all the way to the election. Well it does not add up. It does not add up and that is the reason we will continue with authority to say that if that crew get into power again people will have to watch out if they are nurses or pensioners. 
I will tell members another inspired thing that Gerry Brownlee said on CTV when I debated with him about the Budget last Friday. He was asked a really interesting question on KiwiSaver. It was simply this: “Gerry if you get into power what will you do? Will you tinker with it? Will you reverse it? What will you do?”. Well a splutter a cough a burp a belch and every other noise emanated from him except a straight answer and we know what that means. It is the same legacy and history that National has lived up to since 1976 when under Rob Muldoon it pulled out the carpet from under every pensioner in this country when it did away with the Norman Kirk scheme. That is a fact. Old buggerlugs over there has to put that in his pipe and smoke it. That is something he cannot rebut because it is a historical fact. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: The member cannot refer to another member like that. The member needs to withdraw and apologise. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I withdraw and apologise. It is a fact that the member Nick Smith—who expends a lot of heat in this Chamber; I am told by scientists that 80 percent of heat comes out of one’s head and that could be apt—has to live up to. That is a historical precedent. Then we had Gerry Brownlee who was asked a very similar question. So if we could have thousands of people going into KiwiSaver saying that it is great—for 20 bucks down and with the employer and the Government putting some money in. When a 35-year-old now on about $35000 or $40000 a year is 65 that person could be looking at $40000 a year when he or she retires. 
But what would National do if it got into Government? Oh there is no certainty there of course. No no; those members will wait and will promise anything they think will get them over the line. They think people will not add up or cost their policies and that people who are in KiwiSaver to meet their financial needs in their retirement will not worry about the fact that National members will not tell them today whether they will pull the rug out from under them. I think our communities know the answer—Nick Smith will. He will pull the pin on them. Bill English asked what this Government was doing for workers who are not eligible for it. Yet again he has a lack of awareness of history does he not? With Working for Families 350000 families today are getting on average $98 a week. What would his tax cut have given them? 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: More. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: There we see Nick Smith trying to con the people. He said that a tax cut would have given people more. Again he cannot add up. What the tax cut proposal of National showed was that he on his fat salary would get about $100 a week more and the average Kiwi—and the member would not know one if he fell over one—would be lucky to get between $10 and $20 or $30 a week. But here we see the arrogance the deception and there is another word I will not use. Dr Smith thinks he can just say anything. He thinks he can pop his cork occasionally in Parliament blow off a bit of steam and say what he likes and people will believe him. Well I am sorry; the economics do not add up. A hole was blown in that member and he was slashed apart at the last election by financial analysts who gave people the facts. 
The facts are that with Working for Families 350000 Kiwi families today on average are receiving $98 a week—and then we pile on KiwiSaver and we pile on the extra health spending including $3 prescriptions and cheaper doctors’ fees. We pile it on. The difference is that when we pile it on—and the last 7½ years prove it—it adds up. There are no voodoo economics on this side of the House because our Budgets add up. The problem that that member has is—as he prepares to blow some steam out of his ears in the debate—that he has to stand up and tell us what he will do. He has to stand up and tell us why he did not do those things when he was in Government and tell us why he slashed the pension. I challenge the member Nick Smith today before he blows—because he will take the next call; he has to let off some steam and pull the pin—to tell Kiwis whether he will alter KiwiSaver. Will he get rid of it will he amend it or will he alter it? What will he do? Because if he is consistent with his third-ranked former deputy leader Gerry Brownlee he will hedge and say that he might tinker with it. Even Bill English has come out and said that if people are in KiwiSaver then they should keep hold of their shirt because National might take it off them. That is what he said.