Finlayson Christopher: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Finlayson Christopher: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:773] 
CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National) 
: 
 What a juvenile contribution from the member for Otaki! Mind you when he reaches puberty he will be devastating! 
I want to concentrate rather than on personalities on the issues. Part 3 introduces a scheme that is unworkable and unprincipled. It is very much unprincipled. It was not carefully thought out as Mr English said nor was it reached as a result of policy discussion within the Labour Party nor was it costed by reputable economists. It was a rushed response to poll results indicating the election was slipping away from the Labour Party. It was a hastily devised bribe whose principal architect the member for Hutt South may have some skills when it comes to 5-minute horizons but cannot think long term. And one does not have to be someone who thinks only medium term to know that before the 3-year period is out this bill will be back before the House for further amendments. It was the worst sort of policy devised in the heat of the campaign and Treasury would say “amen” to that. 
The second point—and I would really like the Minister in the chair the member for Dunedin North to wake from his slumber and answer this hypothetical example—is that this policy discriminates against tradespeople. What about the tradesman who wants to set up business as say a plumber or an electrician? He or she has to go to the bank to obtain appropriate loan finance and has to pay that loan back with interest. That is quite frankly as it should be. Any person setting out to build a business who takes out a loan in the expectation that over 20 or 30 years he or she is going to make a lot of money should pay back that loan with interest at commercial terms. Compare that with a student—say one in the position of the member for Otaki—who leaves secondary school at the age of 17 or 18 and not knowing what he or she wants to do goes to university to study some useless subject like peace studies the sort of subject that equips one well for a career in the Labour Party; that person can obtain an interest-free loan study that politically correct rubbish—which my friend the member for North Shore is going to dispose of—then drift off into the workforce. Of the two hypotheticals I have mentioned who actually contributes to the New Zealand economy? Obviously it is the electrician or the plumber. These are the people who grow the economy these are the people who provide useful services but there is nothing for them in this scheme. 
Quite apart from discriminating against tradespeople setting out to build their businesses this legislation also discriminates against hard-working families who send their children to universities. The parents are the ones who should be obtaining tax relief. They are the ones who have nurtured their children raised them and got them to the point where they can go to university and provided that they study the right subjects get ahead. 
The third point I wish to make is that the legislation is unreal. The Deputy Prime Minister said that one aim of the policy was to encourage skilled New Zealanders to invest their skills in the New Zealand economy but it will not achieve that end. New Zealanders will invariably travel overseas for their OE and very little can be done about that and that has been the case for years. One hopes that young people will come back to New Zealand to invest in their country but that is no reason to give them interest-free loans. They will come back if they know they can get ahead in this country and that means our ensuring that for example taxes are not as punitive as they are now. 
I remember well the legal services market having practised in the law for 25 years; the pattern was that lawyers would go overseas spend a few years in a large law firm and come back to New Zealand. The reality is that because of the state of the New Zealand economy because of punitive taxation they now go overseas at the commencement of their career to Australia more likely than not or to England and they never come home. Our not getting the tax rates right will keep New Zealand students overseas. One need mention only the legal services market but it applies to medical students accountants engineers and other graduates of our universities. So students will not necessarily be attracted by this scheme to stay in New Zealand. They will be attracted back to New Zealand only if—[ 
Interruption 
] I do wish the member for Otaki would listen. They will come back to New Zealand only if they can contribute to an economy that has low taxes. So my advice to the member for Otaki is to vote against this part because New Zealanders will not come back if they are going to be saddled with this insane scheme.