Foss Craig: Budget DebateText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoss Craig: Budget Debate[Sitting date: 31 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11486. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon CRAIG FOSS (Minister for Small Business): I was wondering and now I know why all these Labour speakers today are so angry. They seem very excitable and angry and of course with this new continued left takeover of Labour as we have seen announced today with the Labour-Greens merger or whatever they are calling it I can see some of those members’ frustration and anger coming through. Mr Hipkins was very very excitable in his speechearlier. You know he is a good orator in the House of course but I guess he is frustrated at the thought that perhaps Catherine Delahunty from the Greens will become the Opposition spokesman on education.Alastair Scott: Oh imagine.Hon CRAIG FOSS: As we go through that we can start—or perhaps they will be joint leaders or joint owners or whatever they are going to call it. It is quite interesting what we have just seen today. I was just thinking that there are probably two people smiling from ear to ear at these announcements as we discuss the wider ramifications of this Budget. I guess New Zealand First members are very comfortable and happy with today’s announcements because actually it shows that Labour has totally abandoned ground on a voting bloc that they perhaps thought was once theirs. I am sure that the New Zealand First MPs are smiling—yes they are—from ear to ear at what they have seen with the colleagues they might sit with but they can see a mile away as we can what is happening to the left of New Zealand politics. It is now becoming the far left of New Zealand politics.I guess the only other person smiling here—though I am sure there are others—would of course be Nick Smith and perhaps Nicky Wagner who are leading the Bluegreens in our National Party and are leading our concentration on actual things that matter in our environment like pursuing policies that help our environment and preserve our awesome environment in New Zealand. Not like the Greens who tend to endlessly pick up causes be it Dotcom be it Panama/Pelican Brief nonsense—David Clendon: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am sure this contribution we are listening to is interesting to somebody but to date the speaker is several minutes into his 10 minutes and he has not yet once referenced the appropriation bill or the Budget. I wonder whether he might contain himself and give us something on that.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you very much for your point of order. Of course relevancy is for the adjudicator to decide on. It is a wide-ranging debate and those speeches have been wide ranging but your point is well made and no doubt he will have a reference to the Budget forthwith.Hon CRAIG FOSS: Oh of course. As I am speaking on the Appropriation (2016/17 Estimates) Bill interestingly I could segue into—oh I do not know. We could compare it with a Venezuelan Budget actually because the Opposition tends to be going down that track but I might come to that later as I wonder what its version of this same bill might be.This Budget does continue National’s steady-as-she-goes conservative prudent management of our economy of our future and of our people delivering fiscally delivering economically and most importantly delivering socially. It is delivering to those groups of New Zealanders—increasingly so—who most of New Zealand expect deserve or need or require our assistance as a civilised nation and putting resources where they are needed most which will pay dividends later in their lives for themselves and of course for our country. It reflects our country where we are now growing in confidence—an open trading nation. In fact it would be interesting to have that debate with the other side now with those parties’ merger and their continued opposition to free trade and the Trans-Pacific Partnership. As New Zealand is now growing in confidence and is an open trading innovative nation it is reflected in the forecast of the bill and of the Budget and of course it is recorded in our outlook for New Zealand.Interestingly I am looking at Mr Little’s proposed amendment to the motion in the Hon Bill English’s speech. I look at that and essentially that says “and Opposition members will be voting against” if they agree with that amendment—actually they will be voting against business tax changes. These are the most fundamental changes in small business particularly in taxation in decades. The last one was probably when we lowered the business tax rate from 30c to 28c in the dollar. Every election Opposition parties will talk about provisional tax terminal tax and Government compliance around tax. They all promise to do something but in Government they never did—in Government we have. We have committed and we are investing in systems to allow changing the burden of compliance in and around provisional tax to a closer pay-as-you-go—closer to a GST-type—model widely welcomed by small businesses across our country.The Budget delivers surplus ongoing surplus to the tune of about $6 billion in a couple of financial years’ time—pretty good. It continues to deliver on low interest rates creating an environment for certainty creating lower interest rates for all New Zealanders. Remember New Zealanders those who are listening—imagine what their mortgage rates would be now if Labour had continued in office or in fact if Labour was writing this Budget. There would be rampant inflation and rampant double-digit mortgage interest rates like there were when Labour was last in office.Interestingly—and I have not heard other speakers on this one yet—the Budget delivers an improved current account. I recall the Hon Michael Cullen who perhaps struggled against some of his spending Ministers in his time in Government and who must have given up I suppose in his last 3 or 4 years but he continued to talk about the need to fix or work on our current account as have other Labour spokespeople over the years. Yet they are silent on this one because again it shows once forecast it becomes reality: this National Government keeps delivering.The Budget talks about job growth: 200000 new jobs up from 170000 as our economy grows over the forecast period. It forecasts lower Consumers Price Index as I just alluded to. It also though as well as the fiscal side of things delivers higher more increased spending in education in health and across our social services. It is an outstanding Budget an outstanding result and outstanding forecast results in the OECD. With every single country we compare ourselves toand commentators compare us to it is an outstanding result. Even with those outstanding forecasts as Minister Brownlee was talking about earlier some of the assumptions in it are very very conservative. So even getting about 3 percent growth even with a forecast doubling of oil prices and even with a decrease in migration to about 12000 per annum—even with those constraints we are delivering forecast surpluses growing over the next many many years over the forecast period up to about $6 billion in 2020. What a good problem to have.One thing particularly to that previous speaker Carmel Sepuloni: why does the Opposition not embrace and value the social investment approach? Why does it not think it is a good thing that within the limited resources of Government those who actually need assistance now need some wraparound now to help them in their current circumstances and to perhaps get them on a better path for themselves and for our country over many many years to come—why does it not endorse that? I was thinking of Sir Walter Nash actually because what were the first State houses? They were social investment. A long-term investment originally for housing for those who need it and yet Labour—is it now against that type of policy?Carmel Sepuloni: That was social investment.Hon CRAIG FOSS: I can absolutely assure the member who seems to be complaining that it was something about “short-termism” or something like that—actually the whole investment approach as documents have shown as Ministers have spoken about is very very long term. So as MPs we want to look those taxpayers in the eyes and say: “Actually because of this social investment approach we’ve helped so many New Zealanders we’ve helped so many families. We are concentrating on helping them into a home—not necessarily a house. We’ve moved what you would have needed to pay in taxes over the next 30-odd years from $82 billion to around $70 billion.”Carmel Sepuloni: You’ve increased it down the track because you’re not addressing what needs to be addressed now.Hon CRAIG FOSS: That is not too bad and the member obviously did not even do bookkeeping 101 because that is actually what goes on the balance sheet—those kinds of numbers—and that enables better more choices and more options for the Government whichever it might be over the coming years to allocate the resources of the Government to help people through circumstances that are by and large not of their own making.I do worry. We have had this announcement today however it plays out but as the Opposition lurches even further to the left I suggest that if the Opposition parties were running this Budget—if we were wondering what it might look like—over time what we see in Venezuela now is probably not too dissimilar: rampant inflation no control over spending no target of spending or resources or assistance or whatever it might be great rhetoric but actually on the ground those who hurt the most from left spend-up-large Governments such as we seem to be hearing from on the other side are the most vulnerable in our society. I am very proud and comfortable to continue to support this Budget fiscally dryly economically and socially. Thank you.