Burns Brendon: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
Burns Brendon: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:669;Page:16198] 
BRENDON BURNS (Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 Here we are on the third reading of the Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill. The debate on the bill before us has descended into farce. The last three speakers typified the Government’s view of the bill and showed why we are debating at 8.30 p.m. on a Friday legislation that has been effectively superseded by a 71-page Supplementary Order Paper in the last 48 hours. The last three contributions really underscored the contempt that the Government is showing for Parliament the process and the people. 
Mr Boscawen that well-known warrior for the rights of the people provided in 12 words the entire contribution of the ACT Party in the Committee stage and the third reading debate. His contribution consisted of 12 words. He was followed by the Maori Party member. I regret I did not pick up the earpiece to listen to exactly what was contributed by the Maori Party’s whip but I would suggest that it was less than 100 words in respect of this most important legislation and the accompanying 71-page Supplementary Order Paper. 
The tour de force the cream on the cake came from Aaron Gilmore the list MP from Christchurch the know-it-all of the National Party. He contributed about 15 words on the bill. This debate would have been a great opportunity for Aaron Gilmore to stand up while the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery was in the House—he may still be in the precincts—because the bill as I recall from earlier discussion in the Chamber has a new clause in it clause 28B on Supplementary Order Paper 187 regarding taxation treatment of government grants to businesses. I would have thought that was a very good opportunity for Aaron Gilmore to stand up. He would like to be a constituency MP in Christchurch. He hankers for it. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: No he doesn’t. He’s waiting for Eric to resign because he’s got fond memories of Bluff. 
BRENDON BURNS 
: He might have his eyes on constituencies further south but in the interim at least he would like to be regarded as a potential electorate MP for Christchurch. 
I would have thought Aaron Gilmore’s best opportunity would be to stand up take a call and say what the Government had done in respect of government grants to businesses in Christchurch that have been hit very hard as a result of the 4 September earthquake. Some support could have been provided under the bill because the new clause 28B introduced on the just-seen 71-page Supplementary Order Paper provides for the tax treatment of government grants to businesses including payments in the nature of a grant or a subsidy to a business grant-related suspensory loans and payments not in the nature of an advance or loan other than a grant-related suspensory loan. That mechanism on the Supplementary Order Paper provides somebody like Aaron Keown—no not him; he is the more widely known new member of the Christchurch City Council—somebody like Aaron Gilmore who would like to be a constituency MP in Christchurch with his best opportunity to stand up and take a call on behalf of his family who own and operate small and medium sized enterprises of the kind that have been knocked around by the quake in Christchurch. If a scan was taken now I can tell members that small and medium sized enterprises across Christchurch would be seen to be reeling from the earthquake. They were looking for a mechanism to receive assistance and it is there in black and white in the new clause 28B on Supplementary Order Paper 187. It is a mechanism for government grants to businesses and it could have been picked up. 
My colleagues are absolutely right: I think Gerry Brownlee will put that blue-ribbon seat in peril at the election because he is failing. I am hoping that the Minister of Agriculture another Christchurch MP will take a call in this debate and tell us as a member of Cabinet how hard he fought to get some relief like the tax measures provided under the new clause 28B for his would-be constituents the people he grew up with the people in the Canterbury region whom he stood to represent. That clause provides for the taxation treatment of government grants to businesses be they grants subsidies suspensory loans or advances. There are four different mechanisms that could have been used to provide interim relief to the hundreds and hundreds of Christchurch and Canterbury businesses that are feeling absolutely abandoned by this Government a Government that in most instances they probably voted for and that they would have expected to give them some decent opportunities to make their businesses viable and keep them going in the interim. 
They would have looked to the Government in the same way that farmers look to the Government. The next bill to be debated in the House relates to the kiwifruit industry and $25 million of relief is being provided to the kiwifruit industry. I applaud the Government and the Minister for Biosecurity for doing that. Here we have a Supplementary Order Paper which provides a mechanism for the tax treatment of government grants to businesses and that is exactly the sort of mechanism needed in Christchurch right now—right now. If I had an indication from members opposite that they would ensure that there would be support for Christchurch businesses I would be tempted to support them on this bill but we will not hear it. I will bet $1 that we will not be hearing from any members opposite because they are lions when it comes to issues at times and they are lambs at other times. This is very much a lamb time for members opposite. 
They should be standing up and demanding that the Government support at the very least the very modest Canterbury Employers’ Chamber of Commerce package which could have benefited from clause 28B on Supplementary Order Paper 187. Those employers were envisaging some interim modest support. They were going to work in concert with Enterprise North Canterbury which was seeking about $950000. In total Cabinet was being asked to tick off around $4 million worth of support the kind of support that is envisaged by clause 28B. Instead we got a derisory $100000 to be shared with Kaiapoi to promote Canterbury businesses. 
I wish the Ministers in the House tonight would take a call and tell us why we are not seeing that support despite the mechanism in clause 28B. It is about time Ministers explained to the House why they will not stand up to support their constituency of small and medium enterprises. That constituency provides the jobs in Canterbury. Most of the employment comes from small and medium enterprises. They are asking for the sort of relief and support that is envisaged by clause 28B. The Government has the opportunity to put in place and use the tax treatment provided on the Supplementary Order Paper but we are hearing nothing from members opposite. They are not taking calls they are treating the House with contempt they are treating Canterbury with contempt and they will rue the day. They will rue the day because people will not forget that at their time of need when there was a mechanism of tax treatment available the Government abandoned them. The Government abandoned the people of Canterbury at their time of need. 
The Prime Minister came down after the earthquake and said: “We will do whatever it takes to help you Canterbury.” That is on the record; that is what he said. I commend the Government for its early response. Peter Townsend from the Canterbury Employers’ Chamber of Commerce came to the Government and within 5 days it was able to put in place a wage subsidy. I commend the Government for that; I acknowledge that it was very useful. But $15 million was budgeted for that and do members know how much of that $15 million was spent? $12.5 million! It did not spend all of the money that was allocated. Here under clause 28B on the Supplementary Order Paper to this taxation bill is a mechanism that would allow the Government to support Canterbury’s small and medium enterprises that are bleeding jobs for lack of cash flow which is down by half or more. They need assistance and support to get them through. The Christmas period is usually their bumper time but people are not coming into the city and shopping. The cordons around the city are discouraging people and they are staying away. More than that every job that is lost in the central business district is compounding the impact— 
Aaron Gilmore 
: Through the cordons of battle according to “Bad Brendon”! I agree. 
BRENDON BURNS 
: The member opposite’s family businesses will not get the benefit of people being in the central business district and buying their shoes and their shoe linings and having their shoes repaired. Those businesses are not able to get that support any more. They were looking to the Government and the mechanism is there under clause 28B but this Government has abandoned Canterbury at its time of need after a once-in-750-year earthquake. The mechanism is in the bill it is there for the Government to use but the Government has gone deaf on Canterbury. It has gone absolutely deaf and I think it is despicable that as we head into Christmas we have a Government that has effectively abandoned the people of Canterbury and told them they are on their own.