Roy Heather: Goods and Services Tax (Exemption of Healthy Food) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Roy Heather: Goods and Services Tax (Exemption of Healthy Food) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13809] 
Hon HEATHER ROY (ACT) 
: 
 I rise to speak in the first reading of the Goods and Services Tax (Exemption of Healthy Food) Amendment Bill. The ACT Party will not be supporting the bill for a number of reasons. However I commend the sponsor of the bill Rahui Katene for her intent and her motivation in trying to raise awareness of healthy eating in New Zealand. 
Unfortunately one word has been missing from this debate despite the fact that it has been raging backwards and forward across the House and that is “education”. If there is one thing— 
Hon Annette King 
: Read the research; it doesn’t work. 
Hon HEATHER ROY 
: Mrs King says it does not work. During her 9 years in Government she spent all her time saying that education is the best thing since sliced bread. 
This has been a very interesting and enlightening debate because Labour seems to have forgotten that it was in power for 9 years and had the ability to put this measure in place during those 9 long years that we were subject to its policies and Draconian outlook on life. Labour had the numbers. It would have had support from the Green Party and maybe the Maori Party. Labour could have done it but not for a minute did Labour think it was a good idea. It is interesting that all of the hard-hitters of Labour—the leader of the Labour Party the deputy leader of the Labour Party and other Labour caucus members here tonight who are not in Christchurch—are saying that this measure would be a good thing for the country yet in Labour’s 9 long years in power it did not take 2 minutes to even consider that this measure might be a good idea. 
There are several things wrong with this bill but I think that the sponsor of the bill should be congratulated on her motivation. 
Labour said that it does not support the breadth of the definition of healthy food in the bill; Labour wants “healthy food” to be just fruit and vegetables. 
Hon Annette King 
: ACT doesn’t support any of it. 
Hon HEATHER ROY 
: That is right; we do not support it because that is our principled position when it comes to these things. 
I ask whether this bill is about health and healthy eating or about taxation. That is the basic question. The assumption being made by those members who support the bill is that people’s behaviour will be altered by dropping GST. The Green Party stood up and told us that supermarkets are terrible because the prices are exorbitant—as if they are the only places we can buy fruit and vegetables. I ask whether anybody has given any thought to the fact that people can actually grow their own fruit and vegetables. Not very many people do grow their own but those who are serious about saving money go to nurseries or the supermarket and buy the seeds—[ 
Interruption 
]; thank you very much Mr Foss—which they have to pay GST on and I think that is a good thing. There is no proof that people’s behaviour will be altered in any way by reducing GST on healthy foods. 
I think there is also difficulty with the definition of healthy food. To be fair to Mrs King it was mentioned by her. Healthy food is a confusing area and it is much more complex than it may seem. For example fish and chips could be considered healthy because it contains fish and vegetables so it would make sense that GST was removed. But I do not think it should be removed. A Scotch egg was the example that Mrs King used and I agree with her. Part of the reason that Scotch eggs taste so good is that they have quite a high fat content. Eggs are relatively healthy and are accounted for in the bill. 
When we look at the Australian example we see that the issue is very confusing. We need to think carefully about taxation in respect of this bill because removing GST from certain products in the marketplace means that we would lose part of the success of the universality of GST. 
If GST was removed from healthy food of whatever description a precedent would be set and that precedent may affect other goods that people should be encouraged to utilise more. Toothbrushes in Northland might be a good example but I ask whether removing GST from such an item would affect people’s behaviour. Setting a precedent by removing GST from healthy food would raise further questions of whether other goods that are of benefit to society should be exempt. For those reasons and others that I have not had a chance to address the ACT Party will not be supporting this bill.