Scott Alastair: Taxation (KiwiSaver HomeStart and Remedial Matters) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeScott Alastair: Taxation (KiwiSaver HomeStart and Remedial Matters) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 24 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2531. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa): It gives me pleasure to speak to the Taxation (KiwiSaver HomeStart and Remedial Matters) Bill. I am encouraged to hear from across the House general support for this bill despite the comments made by Opposition members. Despite the criticism the moaning the whingeing and the whining they are willing to support it. I guess they are saying it is “tentatively positive”. Those would be their words. I guess they are tentatively positively supporting this bill at this stage which is a good start.The environment for housing could not be better. There is a building boom on right now in Auckland and right across the country. There have been 23000 new housing consents issued. We have had descriptions of the Hunua electorate where you can drive endlessly to see new building sites. New subdivisions have opened up including Hunua and Botany which were used as examples today. This bill means that more than 90000 low and middle income Kiwis who are first-home buyers are eligible to a doubling of support. That is a good thing because it gives young Kiwis first-home buyers a greater chance of getting into their homes.This bill is not a silver bullet. There is no silver bullet as Mr Cosgrove was suggesting. This is part of a considered package of economic development that drives our economy and has driven interest rates down to as low as they have ever been giving first-home buyers an even greater chance to access their first homes. The interest rate is the most important cost to a first-home buyer’s budget. We know that as has been said earlier it was 11 percent 6 years ago. It is half that rate today.Although there is general support I also heard a lot of criticism of the policies of this Government. As we know we have talked about demand and we have talked about supply but can I just reiterate that the supply of housing has been increased dramatically. The special housing areas will make a difference. They are making a difference and they will continue to make a difference. As we know you cannot get consent through the Resource Management Act overnight to build a house which is a completely different subject of course but that leads us on to Resource Management Act reform which is so essential to getting these houses built in a timely manner.It was a little bit concerning to hear the Labour Party’s option of solving the housing problem which was to build their own. A Labour Government would build houses. That is its solution—its silver bullet. I am not sure where Labour would build them but I assume in Auckland. I am not sure whom it would buy the land off but I assume the owner of the property would see it coming because that is what happens when a Government agency comes in with its cheque book. I would assume that Labour would do its best to pick the best place the most appropriate place for the people of Auckland to live in. That is just totally patronising. It is none of the Government’s business to tell the population where they should build their homes and where they should live. Building houses under the design of Mr Grant Robertson would be frightening—it would be frightening. I am not sure what he would have in his house but it would be different from mine.Then we had the solutions—the silver bullets if you like—from the Greens. They talked about five points and I managed to write down only four because I was giggling in my shoes at their suggestion of a capital gains tax for a start. A capital gains tax is exactly what you do not want when you are trying to solve a housing problem particularly if I am assuming a household would be exempt. If you have got a capital gains tax and you exempt your house it drives people obviously to jump through the loophole and buy the biggest the flashest and the most expensive home that they can possibly afford. That simply drives up the price of homes. That is what will happen given the proposal of a capital gains tax with a household as an exemption.The second point raised was about restricting foreigners. We have heard before about the registration of foreigners—they are coming in with their money and we do not want their money of course because money from offshore is a bad thing. That is unfortunately a very naive assertion coming from the Greens. We know that New Zealand as a country is short of capital. We are screaming out for capital. We are trying to attract capital to our regions. So restricting foreigners would not only drive capital away from New Zealand but drive it away from our regions in particular which is exactly where we would like some investment to be made by foreigners even those Asian foreigners—the foreigners whom the Opposition would like to put on a register. A register of foreign owners is only going to turn them away. It is only going to encourage them to invest elsewhere. It is only going to encourage them to go to Australia. What also happens—[Interruption]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Can the member take his seat. I encourage the member Tracey Martin to take a breath. Interjections are supposed to be rare reasonable and witty if possible not a constant barrage.ALASTAIR SCOTT: Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. I was talking about this registration of foreign owners which is only going to turn capital away from New Zealand and from our regions. Of course when you create rules you also create loopholes. That register would only create loopholes. So when a foreigner comes in to buy something that I might own like some shares in Chorus and I go and choose to buy a home in Auckland would I be registered on the Opposition’s register? Such are the loopholes that you suggest and that people would take advantage of. The fourth silver bullet if you like from the Greens—Stuart Nash: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I heard what you said about Tracey Martin but the member has spoken for about 6 minutes on things that are completely unrelated to this bill whatsoever. I think what Tracey Martin was doing was highlighting the fact that she wants to know what is actually in this bill and how it is going to benefit Kiwis.Jami-Lee Ross: The debate so far has been very wide ranging on housing. This deals specifically with housing solutions and I think that is why the member has been focusing on housing.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I thank the members. I take the points. I will continue to listen closely. I do acknowledge that the debate I have heard so far has been wide ranging from both sides. Please continue.ALASTAIR SCOTT: Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. I was talking about the Greens’ proposal which was mentioned in this debate regarding the regional development project of targeting regions to build houses in. So you build houses in a certain place—but who is going to go there? You have got to create jobs. You have got to invest capital in the regions. You cannot just build houses where a Labour Party policy or a Green policy might choose to centrally control and dictate. You have got to leave it to the market to decide.What this bill does—coming back to the bill—is it allows first-home buyers to choose where they buy their home where they invest. They can come to Masterton or they can go to Wellington or to Auckland. This bill enables and—as we are talking about demand—it does increase the demand for houses. That is absolutely right. It does that but only in a very narrow section of the buyer market and that is the first-home buyer. Combined with the loan-to-value ratios which exempt new homes this is one of many policies—there are no silver bullets—that contribute to new families and young families getting into their first home. Thank you.