Ardern Shane: Budget Debate 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Ardern Shane: Budget Debate 
[Sitting date: 30 May 2012. Volume:680;Page:2700. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki - King Country) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to take a call in the debate on the 2012 Budget which is a forward-looking Budget in times of very challenging economic circumstances. I know that it is lost on our opponents on the other side of the House that there is a major meltdown taking place in Europe as we speak. It has absolutely escaped Labour’s attention that in the US what is being described as a second recession is potentially going to take place. Listening to our opponents on the other side the rest of the world is flat and the only place where there is an economic plan is back here in New Zealand and it is contained within the Labour Party.  
Let us have a look at what Labour has been saying. It has been saying that the way to prosperity in New Zealand is to tax the industries that are prosperous which means the agricultural sector with a capital gains tax on farming. A capital gains tax; that is the answer! If something is moving too quickly you tax it. If it keeps moving you tax it some more. If it stops moving you subsidise it to get it moving again. That has always been the Labour plan. It has been tried and it has failed around the world. If you look at the excesses of some of the spending in Europe and look at the type of Government policies there over recent years you can sheet some of that same philosophy right back here to New Zealand.  
Let us have a look at what this Government is doing. It is responsibly managing the Government’s finances building a more competitive and productive economy delivering better public services and of course rebuilding Christchurch. The Government has in mind a 3 percent growth rate within a short period of time. This is a very aspirational goal in the circumstances that we find ourselves in. If you look at what our opponents are offering us this level of growth is certainly a brighter much more focused direction. Growth in New Zealand over the next 3 years is forecast to be higher than Europe’s rate of 0.5 percent and the United Kingdom’s of just over 1 percent. So what you are looking at is an economy in New Zealand based on the agricultural sector which is dependent on exporting in the wider economic climate and which has a set of rules around it that will deliver those results.  
It was interesting to read in the  
Dominion Post  
today—not usually somewhere where you would go to find a friend of the agricultural sector—where it said: “Agriculture is the sensible choice to base such a vision on.” The writer was talking about a vision for how to grow the New Zealand economy. KPMG’s latest  
Agenda 
 magazine said: “Now is the time for the diverse companies that produce New Zealand’s food fibre and timber products to explore how they can work together—with the government—to make the primary sector New Zealand’s pathway to prosperity.” This comes directly from today’s  
Dominion Post 
. I could not agree more and I congratulate the  
Dominion Post 
 on having the good sense to pick up on and write something like that because what do we hear from our Green opponents and our Labour opponents? The way to grow New Zealand apparently is to place so many restrictions on our agricultural sector that there is no way that it could grow. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Tell us about DIRA. 
SHANE ARDERN 
: Well I would love to tell the member about the Dairy Industry Restructuring Act but you know I probably would not be able to give him the intelligence to understand it. I understood that it was duck shooting season and obviously one or two have escaped the maimai. The reality is that this economy is an agricultural-based economy. It will be interesting to see how that member responds to the dairy industry restructuring legislation over the next few days because he is going to be given a chance to have a view on that. It will be interesting to hear what the member’s view is.  
This economy must grow and has always grown through the prosperity of the agricultural sector. What is it that we need to do in times of hard economic circumstances? One of the things we need to do is have a look at what will actually make the economy grow. When we look at what our opponents have done we ask whether they support further infrastructure and development in our agriculture sector. No. Will they support the bill that the member interjected about the dairy industry restructuring legislation? Well we are yet to find out. It would probably be without precedent if they do not support it because when it comes to issues of such economic importance they always have done. So I look forward to their support there.  
They want to put out business by producing a tax system that incentivises a whole lot of non-productive activity and puts a penalty on those businesses that produce. Do they support the 90-day probation period for new employees for example? No they do not and they never have. Do they support any labour-market reforms? No they do not. Do they support the $1.5 billion put into ultra-fast broadband which is hugely important to the agricultural sector? Do they understand that when you are an export country you need to be able to export from the areas where you produce the products like rural New Zealand? Do they support the $30 million investment in rural broadband? No. Do they support the 3000 jobs that came in through the 
 Hobbit 
 movies? No.  
What do they support? What will they support? Will they support the irrigation proposals in the South Island? No. What will they support? Do they support the $5 billion to $7 billion in the mixed-ownership model which potentially could be invested in high tech education? No. So what we are hearing from our opponents is a whole lot of hot air. In fact when you listen to the Green Party members you do really wonder—and I seriously do wonder—whether they could carry out some of their policies if they were ever in a position of power. Would they be mad enough to do it? It is a real test. Would they actually be mad enough to do what they say they would do? Because if they did they would bring the economy— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think there are probably two grounds on which you could rule that comment out of order. One is the blatantly sexist language that has been used. Second is the implication of a lack of courage which I definitely object to. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The member cannot say that someone is mad so he should be careful how he expresses himself. 
SHANE ARDERN 
: I do not intend to challenge your ruling Mr Speaker in any way at all. Would Green Party members carry out what they say they will carry out? Would they? Could they? And what would happen to the New Zealand economy if they did? That is a very good question. What would happen to the New Zealand economy? If they were to place the restrictions on agriculture that they say they would place on agriculture what would happen to the New Zealand economy?  
Let us go back and have a look at some of the rhetoric around some of the recent things that have been said. I see Mr Hughes in the House. I notice that he recently found out where Taranaki is. There must be something up there for which he could get his name in the newspaper. He was found to be wanting in terms of his facts over that debate as well.  
What have we heard from the Labour-Green Opposition? We have heard a speech from the new incoming Labour leader David Shearer. He said that we needed to create an economy similar to Norway. He said we needed to have a Nokia in this country and we needed to move into the high tech end of the economy.  
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Norway? 
SHANE ARDERN 
: What I want to say to the member opposite who constantly interjects— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Wrong country. You don’t say Taranaki and Hawke’s Bay are the same things.  
SHANE ARDERN 
: The member constantly interjects but what does he think Fonterra is if it is not the New Zealand equivalent of Nokia. What does he think turning milk products into an asthma inhaler substance is if it is not high tech? What does he think developing very sophisticated nutraceuticals which help that member ride his bike is if not a high tech industry? What does he think developing very sophisticated food products and ingredients is if not high tech? I know that it is lost on the member. I know we could talk about it for some time but he would not want to listen to or hear that view.  
What is the biggest threat to the New Zealand economy? It is the Labour Party and the Green Party. What is the biggest threat to the environment? It is the continual bashing of agriculture despite what the agricultural sector is doing to turn that round. If you actually look at where the best opportunity for future development for New Zealand and further enhancement for the environment will come from it will not come from within our cities. I would like the Green Party to apply the same standard to outfalls from cities as it applies to the agricultural sector. When those members go out and start campaigning up and down New Zealand about clean streams and when they are blaming the dairy industry for pollution they should at least take a photograph of a dairy cow and not a beef cow standing in the streams. At least that would be a start. That would show they are genuine at least. But they cannot find a dairy cow standing in a stream.