Willis Nicola; Parker DavidNICOLA WILLIS (National): I wish to return to clause 5 of Supplementary Order Paper 23 which amends Part 2 as it emerged from the committee. This relates to the main home exclusion from the capital gains tax (CGT) because the context for this bill and what we have been told about the intent of this bill is that it aims to impose a capital gains tax on property investors. That is widely understood to be people who own more than one property mostly a family home and then another property. But what I now understand from the comments that the Minister made earlier in response to my questions is that we now have the novel and extreme situation created by this bill that someone who owns but one property—one property—and that property is their family home if that person for whatever reason is unable to occupy their home for a period of 12 months or more then they will become subject to a capital gains tax.Now I just want to dwell on this Minister because is the Minister really telling this House and the New Zealand public that he thinks the following categories of people should have a capital gains tax placed on the sale of their family home? Let us imagine a scenario where someone is gravely ill. They have cancer or their child has cancer and they are told that the place where they live—let's say it's Hokitika—is no longer a good place to be in terms of accessing the regular daily treatment they will require for their particular kind of cancer. So that individual makes a decision that whether it's for their good or the good of their child who has cancer they are going to rent a property in Christchurch—or perhaps they're put up in the Ronald McDonald House—for a period of a year so that they can access regular medical treatment. What this Minister I take it from what you've said in your answers to earlier questions would do to that family—if they chose to keep their family home and rent it out; rent it out for the very good purpose that they're trying to get a little bit of income to pay for the rental in Christchurch while they're going through their medical appointments—is say Well it's no longer your main family home. I'm going to put a CGT on you. I'm going to take tax from you because when you sold your house it was no longer meeting my tax definition of being the family home because you had the temerity to rent it out." Now I find that shocking Minister that you would breach what has been a clear commitment to New Zealanders a very clear promise that Labour would not impose a CGT on the family home.So I've given you the example of someone who has to access medical treatment. Let me give you some other examples of circumstances in which people who only have one property—let's remember here in this circumstance this is someone who owns one family home but for some reason is having to live somewhere else for a period of time could only be for 13 months; might only be for a year and a half—and they during that period choose to either rent another place or perhaps stay with friends but in any circumstance that would then mean they become subject to your capital gains tax. So the other scenarios could be someone who needs to move for work for a period. Someone who for a period of time needs to move and perhaps work in Palmerston North for a while because that's where their business operations are focused while they're doing a particular project. Or would this perhaps be imposed on someone who for work reasons is asked to do a specialty secondment? Let's think of the example of these wonderful people we have working in our managed isolation and quarantine facilities at the moment. We have army officers we have medical practitioners who have moved their lives to run our quarantine systems and in some cases they may want to keep their family home and rent it out for a while while they're gone—rent it out for a little while to keep paying the bills to keep paying the rates while they live somewhere else for a short period of time and what I understand this Minister wants to do is slap them with a capital gains tax. I cannot understand how this Government is keeping its commitment to make sure the family home doesn't face a capital gains tax if these provisions are allowed to proceed. What I want to understand from the Minister is why these provisions have been introduced into this bill tonight and what it is that has caused the family home to now be subject to a capital gains tax and why that Minister hasn't given consideration to the life events of people in the realistic circumstances in which some people can't live in their family home for a period of time. The Minister must explain.Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister of Revenue): This bill does not introduce a capital gains tax. It is an extension to the brightline test."