White HelenHELEN WHITE (Labour): I rise in opposition to this bill. I'd like to take the analogy that some of my colleagues have made and turn it round. The proposal here as I understand the calculations from my friend Deborah Russell is that a person on $200000 would in their pocket have $1200 per annum extra a person on $400000 would have $2400 extra in their pocket every year and a person that is only on $100000 would get $556 per annum back in their pocket. That's money that's going into the coffers at the moment of the State and the State are using it to support a whole lot of things that need supporting. And the things that need supporting are absolutely targeted I am proud to say at our middle and low income earners. So that $2400 that someone on $400000 a year actually contributes by this method into the economy gets spent on things like lunches in schools it gets spent on benefit increases and that money in turn that is spent on benefit increases goes straight into the economy.Now I actually happen to have the pleasure of the company of quite a few people who do earn $400000 and more and I would like to take issue—and I have before—with Mr Seymour on this. Those people are good people but they do not work harder than our nurses or anybody in the lower brackets. I object philosophically but also practically to the suggestion that what we are doing is not looking after our hard workers. Our hard workers worked in COVID for very very little. I was ashamed at some of the rates of pay that were around at that time for people who are actually pivotal to our economy. And I want to see an economy which really supports them and so I want somebody on $400000 yes to pay $2400 more and I want to redistribute that money to people to support them in those other areas.Hon Simon Bridges: She's proud to be a socialist.HELEN WHITE: And I am absolutely a socialist and pleased to be one because it's a very very important thing that we actually address the gap between rich and poor in this country because we will pay for it Mr Bridges in many ways. We have paid for it and we are lucky we haven't paid for it more than we have.We have a system where people have actually broken down as a consequence of this kind of cavalier policy which in disguise it calls itself fairness" and it calls itself "redistribution to working people." Good hardworking people apparently are going to buy a house with their $8. They are not. They are going to buy a house because this Government is going to support them into houses because we are going to build houses because we are going to actually produce emergency housing and actually we're not leaving them in cars and this is a very very important difference. So yes I think it is an ideological difference. I think it is a clear difference between this side of the House and the National Party and ACT. And I think what Mr Seymour has said when he said "Let's actually give this bill a go and add to it."—a flat tax that actually means that the poorer people pay an obscene amount more than the rich people—it actually bares it shows what is actually going on in that party and I hope New Zealanders take account of tonight's comments because that kind of flat tax is actually about putting a lot more money into the hands of the wealthiest people in our economy. And guess what Mr Woodhouse? They will not spend it in the economy; they will go to Fiji if they can. They will go and spend it on expensive cars they will not actually spend it in our economy in the way that our poorer people will.It's very very important to me that we are closing that gap that we are seeing the connection between people because even if we are on extreme amounts of money in our careers—which we are lucky enough to be—we all have friends and relations and we're all connected and I do not want anyone left behind in this country. That is why I cannot see this bill as being anything but a stalking horse for actually putting $2400 into the hands of our friends earning $400000 a year. I want to see that money go absolutely to all the people in our lower brackets. Wages must go up in this country and that is a good thing. Thank you. That is why I will not be supporting this bill."