Burns Brendon: Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
Burns Brendon: Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:669;Page:15887] 
BRENDON BURNS (Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 I have to question this Government’s priorities. We are a week away from the end of the parliamentary sitting year and here we are with the introduction of the Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill in which the priority is abolishing gift duty for the wealthy. Some members opposite may recall that 3 months ago my province of Canterbury was hit by a force 7.1 earthquake. It has faded from view for some people including some members opposite but not for many members of the Canterbury business community. Tonight they still face the impacts of that quake and those impacts extend to their businesses. They are not looking for a bill to abolish gift duty; they are looking for some assistance from the Government to help them through a period that has seen in many instances turnover reduce by 50 percent or more since the quake. 
A week ago last night I attended one of the many business group meetings that have been happening in my city of Christchurch. I was one of two MPs there; the other was the Hon Jim Anderton. It was a meeting called by concerned business owners who cannot sustain the jobs that they want to hold on to in the face of the impact of the quake on top of a recession that still very strongly lingers in Canterbury and across the country. At that meeting one of the speakers was a woman called Judy Tardi who for more than 20 years has run the Aspiring Language Institute. She is a Hungarian migrant who came to New Zealand for the opportunities that it presented. She has worked very very hard. She has paid her taxes. She is not looking for a cut in gift duty. She told the meeting she had survived the impacts business-wise of 9/11 and of the severe acute respiratory syndrome crisis. Indeed she had survived the recession. But on 4 September a 7.1 magnitude earthquake flattened not only many parts of Christchurch and Canterbury but also the prospects of many businesses including hers. 
Judy Tardi’s business turnover is down by 80 percent and she is not even sited within the central business district of Christchurch; she is based further out in my electorate of Christchurch Central in St Albans. But the images of the quake endure. The only images of Christchurch and Canterbury that people who in the past might have come and taken up courses at her language college have seen are of a city that is very badly damaged. Despite the fact that 90 percent of the city is perfectly fine the images on television do not convey that. Judy Tardi has now borrowed $85000 on her own mortgage to try to keep her business going and her staff employed. She asked why the Government is not providing some assistance to her. 
Judy Tardi is not alone in asking that. Another speaker at the meeting was Ange Leonard who runs the City Seafood Market retail outlet in Christchurch. It was a top shop finalist last year. Her turnover despite the business premises not being affected by the quake is down by 50 percent. She has had to let two staff go. Those businesses are only a fraction of the hundreds of businesses across Christchurch and Canterbury that have been knocked for six by the quake and its ramifications because people are not coming into the inner city in the same way as they used to. They are going to the malls; they are staying away from the central business district. Those businesses are not looking for a cut in gift duty. They are not looking for this bill; they are looking for something to assist them. They want a helping hand with their cash flow. 
The Canterbury Employers Chamber of Commerce put up a package to the Government—a very modest package—for $3.1 million to assist businesses like the two that I have detailed and many hundreds of others. Nothing was sought in that package in respect of the abolition of gift duty. It related to assisting businesses with such expenses as relocation costs when they have had to move. That package was turned down flat last Monday and instead a pathetic derisory package was announced by the so-called Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Gerry Brownlee. What Canterbury got after a 7.1 magnitude quake which was the biggest in this nation’s history and the biggest single natural disaster that we have ever seen in our nation was a package that provided two full-time business mentor advisers and a half-time person in Kaiapoi. It was two business advisers and $100000 to promote Canterbury business—$100000 to be shared with Kaiapoi to promote Christchurch and Canterbury business. That by my estimation would buy two television commercials on Australian television—and the people of Australia still have those enduring images of earthquake damage as do many other people around the world. 
Again I have to ask the question where on earth are this Government’s priorities? We have a city that is still feeling the ramifications of our worst natural disaster. Why are the Canterbury members of Parliament opposite not standing up for their constituents and for their businesses which have been knocked for six by this quake? Here we are debating the introduction of a bill that is simply a further tax cut for those at the top end of the income spectrum when we have very fine business people who want to continue employing people but who have been unable to hold on to staff in many instances because of the impact of the quake and all that it has brought upon our city and region. We are not seeing the advocacy that we expect from members opposite when it comes to saying this is a time when the Government needs to come to the help of Cantabrians. 
This is a time when we expect the Government to intervene. If one is a farmer affected by snowstorms then one looks to the Government. If we have a region affected by drought we look to the Government. If we have a region affected by floods we look to the Government. Well surely when we have a region like mine which has been affected by a 7.1 magnitude quake of the type size and scale that the  
Dominion Post  
suggested today could result in 1500 lives being lost in the city of Wellington and the response package from the Government is an absolutely pathetic derisory $100000 promotional package and a couple of business mentor advisers— 
John Hayes 
: Well you spent all the surpluses over 9 years. 
BRENDON BURNS 
: The member for Wairarapa is very welcome to stand up and defend that package. He can tell his constituents back in the Wairarapa that he thinks it is appropriate. He can tell them that if the Wairarapa is struck by a 7.1 magnitude quake they can expect to receive $100000 to promote their region because that is what has been given to Canterbury. 
The reason that was given for not providing more help and assistance to the Canterbury business community was the fear of creating a precedent. What on earth does that mean? I ask whether that means that if Wellington is struck by a 7.1 magnitude quake it will not receive any funding because this Government’s priorities are very firmly focused on such measures as introducing another tranche of tax cuts for those at the top end of the income spectrum and not on delivering assistance for people who are trying to keep businesses going in Canterbury. 
Amy Adams 
: This is pathetic—pathetic and not correct. 
BRENDON BURNS 
: The member for Selwyn is very welcome to take a call and defend that package. I would be delighted to have her solidarity because I tell members that I have been raising these issues and I have been asking these questions and I have not heard a peep from members like her who should be defending their constituents. She should be standing up taking a call and saying: “Give us a go Minister. We are in need in Canterbury.” It is about time that the member did that. Instead of giving eloquent speeches about the impact of the earthquake on her personally she should take a call and say to the Minister and the Government that this package is not good enough and that we should not be debating a week before Parliament adjourns a bill that simply gives more money to those who do not need assistance. 
When we have good employers in Canterbury bleeding jobs and an inner city devastated by an earthquake all that the Government can do is to come up with a package of $100000 to promote our city. It is pathetic it is derisory and it gives the fingers to Canterbury. It is appalling treatment. It is appalling treatment by this Government and the Government members stand condemned for it. If they will not stand up take a call and criticise their Government then they should not hold their seats at the next election. The people of Canterbury will judge them on the basis of that package. People will judge those members on that basis because they have failed miserably to stand up for their constituents and give people what they are asking for. A very modest assessment was proposed by the Canterbury Employers Chamber of Commerce and $100000 was given instead of $3.1 million. It was a modest request from a responsible chamber which is well led and well organised. That is what Canterbury needed and instead we got this bill.