McClay ToddHon TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua): I find myself in the unusual situation in the first time in my political career agreeing with that last member Glen Bennett when he read out and said that the problem with the interchange fees charged by the banks for the credit cards they use is the poor old retailer must pass them on to the consumer. They can't absorb them. They can't put them somewhere else. Actually many of the retail customers small shops in New Zealand are doing it very difficult. They must pass it on. And of course that is the case whenever a cost is imposed on a business. They must pass it on. With the Matariki bill that was passed just last week there's a $450 million cost that's being imposed upon these businesses and just like what the last speaker said the banks are doing it must be passed on.In fact if we look at what the Labour Party has done in the very very very long 4½ years they have been in Government—very very long for the small businesses that the last speaker said they were sticking up for—there's almost $2.6 billion worth of additional cost that has been imposed not on the economy not on the taxpayer—because the Government has borrowed it and spent it—but on businesses in New Zealand. So on the one hand we have members of the Government coming forward and saying every little bit counts and the saving through this legislation of $74 million for small business—won't have to pass on to the consumer any more—is very small by comparison to the cost this Government has imposed upon businesses that is being passed on to consumers. It is no wonder we have a cost of living crisis in New Zealand with inflation so high because on the one hand in four measures alone that this Government campaigned on and has put in place at a cost of over $2 billion there is this small saving of $74 million. I tell you what if you go and ask the average consumer Do you want another $74 million worth of savings to small business so your costs don't go up but on the other hand we're going to put $2 billion back on you?" they would work it out for themselves.This is the interesting thing about the Labour Party. It's the small things that they try to get right like this legislation that actually don't make the difference for consumers. It's the big things that they instantly always get wrong that is what is harming business in New Zealand and harming consumers. Take the very very fast and significant increases to the minimum wage. I'm yet to hear anybody in this House—Dr Duncan Webb: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. The member has been talking about all kinds of things and I'm just referring to Speaker's ruling 128/8: "Members must confine themselves to the main purposes and contents of the bill; … [not] with matters not provided for in the bill." The member's well out of order.Hon TODD McCLAY: Speaking to the point of order Madam Speaker. The thing about debate is one gets to rebut and members opposite in every single speech—there hasn't been a full 10 minutes; it's been a very short period of time—have made the case of how this is assisting and it is helping consumers. I merely in drawing on the saving that they're speaking to in this bill—the additional costs that actually aren't helping consumers—am making the case that consumers are not better off. I'm actually only three minutes into my speech which is much longer than most of the Government's speeches.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): It is up to the Speaker to determine relevancy and I invite the speaker to come back to the bill.Hon TODD McCLAY: Thank you very much. Well the great thing about this bill is there is a saving of $74 million. A quick amount of maths would suggest that whilst that is welcome it wouldn't be as welcome as so very many other changes that could be there.Here's the most interesting thing about that point of order: it's that actually the Government would like consumers in New Zealand to only think about what's in this legislation. They're not willing to allow debate on anything other in this case than what is here. And yes there is a saving; it's not a bad thing. In fact it would be great if there was a way to add Supplementary Order Papers to this to amend this when we get to future stages to save the consumer even more. Because here is something you will notice as this legislation enters into force: the consumer will hardly notice the saving because it will be taken over by additional cost across the board that will be levied by this Government. Because here's something else that is extremely important: when the Government stands up and says it wants to save the consumer money it should do that in every piece of legislation that comes forward. And every time this Government brings legislation to the House that will impose cost upon consumers we'll get to stand up and say "Remember a long time ago that piece of legislation when they decided the banks were the bad guys so they were going to make a change there and save $74 million?"—long forgotten because there's extra costs and the additional costs that will be brought forward.The members of Government talk a lot about small businesses. They talk very little about the small businesses that have closed and that have gone who are waiting not for this legislation but any other help that could allow them to get there. The $74 million of savings from this legislation spread across small businesses in New Zealand is very small by comparison to the amount of debt that these small businesses have taken on over the last 2½ years alone. And it is the case that when consumers go and they pay for something with their cards—and in some cases some retailers on-charge the cost to them of up to a percent and a half; others absorb it—what the consumer then may say to that small business is "Well why is it that I have to pay 1.5 percent on this retail item that I'm having to buy for my family that is so much more expensive today than it used to be when this saving the Government is talking about means that prices in the supermarket or prices in the corner dairy or prices anywhere will go down?" And the answer to that sadly is they won't.This is a worthy piece of legislation. It has taken effect in other countries around the world. And in fact the Government is merely mimicking I suppose or following changes Australia made some time ago. But here's the other very interesting thing: this was a promise that was made before the last election by the Government I would suggest trying to divert attention from the very other many costs that they also said they would impose.But I remember another promise made two elections ago which should be being delivered in this legislation at the same time because there would be less of a saving for the consumer but more money in the pocket of everyday workers: do you remember when they said they were going to get rid of secondary tax? Well there are members in the House actually who on a daily basis have constituents get in touch with them saying "We are still being charged secondary tax." Well how come that hasn't been fixed but this one has? Because the cost to workers having to pay secondary tax and then wait until the end of the year to get it back is much much greater than the $74 million the Government says is a saving in this legislation and therefore one of the best things that they have done. And in fact I will give them that: one of the best things that they have done to help consumers over 4½ years is a $74 million saving that's not going to make the petrol at the pump cheaper. It won't make the food any cheaper. It's not going to make the rent any cheaper. And in fact if we look at all the other things the Government has done that are bad for business and bad for small business bad for consumers the prices are going one way and it is only up.Can I finally say to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs who brought this forward: he is digging away in his portfolio as hard as he can. I wish he had more support from his colleagues in other areas because some of the legislation he's brought forward is worthwhile. It will make a very very small difference but at least he's bringing things forward to the House to make a difference. Where this Government is letting down the New Zealand public is in the big things not the small things like this. The next speaker in the debate will get up and say "Well a $74 million saving is not small." It is when you have just piled $450 million worth of cost on to the New Zealand consumer through small business in one day alone next year—in one day alone.Consumers in New Zealand are worse off under this Government. Retailers in New Zealand largely particularly small ones are worse off under this Government. In fact there's not a single thing this Government's got its hands on that's not going up in price. Congratulations to the Minister for being able to get one of the smallest savings I've seen in a long time through Cabinet. It's a great shame they don't give this Minister much more responsibility. Imagine if he was allowed to do something big that actually could turn the ship around help business in New Zealand get them back on their feet and be good for consumers at the same time. We live in hope. This legislation won't do it. Albeit with the tide of extra cost being dumped on New Zealand households and New Zealand businesses at least here's a tiny little win for them here. It's almost worth celebrating."