Finlayson Christopher: Budget Debate 
Finlayson Christopher: Budget Debate 
[Volume:639;Page:9620] 
CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National) 
: 
 That was a great Opposition MP’s speech from the member for New Plymouth. I must say that he does angry very well indeed and I am impressed. 
The reality is that last week’s Budget was dismal. It revealed not only the Government’s lack of competence but also its lack of imagination or understanding of New Zealand’s real economic situation. Indeed the only time the Minister of Finance got anywhere near to announcing something exciting was when he reannounced National’s charities policy. As the Associate Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage who is also in charge of intellectual property issues believe it or not would tell us there is no copyright in ideas but at least the Minister of Finance could have had the class to acknowledge where Labour’s policy came from—it copied us. 
The reality of the matter is that this is Michael Cullen’s last Budget and he will be on the scrap heap this time next year. This Budget was as consistent as his other seven Budgets in that it lacked any real solutions to the problems facing New Zealand. For example there will be no improvement in the current account deficit; we are sinking deeper and deeper into debt. There will be no improvement in wages and indeed our growing pay gap with Australia is fast approaching a crisis. There is nothing to suggest that the Government understands the need to boost productivity and grow the economy. 
Labour has had 8 years to attend to these matters and it has done nothing. It has had 8 years in which to lift productivity but the only things that have grown are interest rates. The Prime Minister promised us in 1999 that she would take New Zealand back into the top half of the OECD yet we can look at the figures. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: What happened? 
CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: I can tell Mr Auchinvole that in  
The Economist  
guide to the world in 1988 our GDP per capita was slightly less than Australia’s but we were ahead of countries like Spain and Ireland. Our situation today is very different indeed. We are way behind Australia and we are way behind Ireland and Spain. The Greeks the Slovenians and the Portuguese are catching up with us. At this rate within a few years we will be behind Greece and Portugal and those great countries of Central Europe—the Czech Republic and Hungary—will be ahead of us as well. [ 
Interruption 
] Dr Lockwood Smith interjects very well and says that this will be changed only if there is a National Government. The situation is very serious. 
What is the response of Labour members when they are confronted with these stark economic realities? 
Chris Auchinvole 
: What is it? 
CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: We saw it from Mr Duynhoven. They just stand up and blame National and what happened in the 1990s. Indeed Mr Duynhoven even went back to 1975. For example this afternoon Mr Cunliffe answered a question about broadband and he blamed us for the light-handed regulation of telecommunications in the 1990s. He failed to note it was Labour that privatised Telecom in 1990 and that the Bolger administration inherited from the last Labour Government the very regulatory framework that Mr Cunliffe criticised today. That member does not even know his own party’s history while in Government. 
Every time Labour members are criticised they come back with “In the 1990s this and in the 1990s that.” and in the case of Mr Duynhoven “In 1975 this.” Real adults stand on their own two feet and accept responsibility for their own actions. But I can honestly say that in my 20 months in this place I have never once seen any Labour Minister accept responsibility for any failure or failings of the administration of his or her department. A little while ago the Prime Minister told us she was rewriting the  
Cabinet Manual 
 to incorporate her new confidence and supply arrangements. What she did not tell us was that she was striking a red line through the doctrine of ministerial responsibility as well. 
I would now like to pay some attention to some of the areas for which I have responsibility. First I want to say something about Vote Treaty Negotiations. The reality is that this Labour-led Government has had two failures as Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations. On 20 July 2000 the first failure announced the adoption of six principles to guide the Government in negotiating settlements of historical claims under the Treaty of Waitangi. These included adequate provision to ensure there was reasonable and sufficient provision for settlement of Treaty claims in Budgets. In the 2007-08 Vote Treaty Negotiations there will be approximately $29 million which represents a $900000 increase on the corresponding figure for the previous year. But this does not even represent an increase in order to keep up with inflation. After taking inflation into account the vote actually decreases. In the period from 2000-01 up until the latest year Vote Treaty Negotiations has increased by about $1.21 million but that represents a reduction in the vote after inflation of about $4.8 million. 
What will the money be used for? 
Chris Auchinvole 
: What will it be used for? 
CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: I can tell Mr Auchinvole that there appear to be no initiatives to speed up and improve the negotiating process—just $900000 being thrown at the existing failing process. But that sum will not overcome the fundamental failings with the process and the lack of leadership provided by the current Minister. The amount set aside for land banks is capped at $10 million but that is not enough to buy a Landcorp farm as events this year showed. The total amount the Government expects to spend on settlements this year is only $60 million but at least two of the current settlements are very much under pressure and I believe that money could remain unspent. 
Then we are told that the tribunal will receive about $7.7 million over the next 4 years to help the Government to push its objective of settling all historic claims by 2020. But the fine print of the Budget certainly does not point to a sudden surge of settlements. I believe that given the current level of performance it is simply dreaming. Whatever happened to the proposal by the first failure as Minister back in 2000 to persuade Cabinet to seek a comprehensive review of the Treaty of Waitangi Act? At the time she said she thought a review was needed to ensure the future role and focus of the tribunal was consistent with the Government’s overall objectives in both the historical and contemporary issues. But as so often happens with this Government much was promised and very little was delivered. The sad reality of the Treaty negotiations process is that the Labour Government’s performance constitutes an irredeemable failure. The tragedy of the present situation is that there will be a continuation of drift waffle and lack of achievement until the next election. 
So it is in the justice area. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: Is it the same? 
CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: It is exactly the same. The Minister of Finance mouthed the usual inanities about the Budget seeking to ensure that New Zealanders will have “a safe and just society” through increased funding to the justice sector. But the only practical proposal appears to be for a new Supreme Court building. Additional funding appears to have been provided to the Human Rights Commission to improve “service delivery”. Hopefully that will not mean senior officers of that commission going on any more jaunts to dubious International Bar Association conferences as we learnt were going on when the Justice and Electoral Committee reviewed the performance of that suboptimal commission a few weeks ago. 
What about the implementation of the new Coroners Act referred to by Dr Cullen? Will the additional money achieve anything? I doubt it. In fact I heard of one particularly sad case a week or so back where a young lady had been killed in Piha in January but her mother cannot close down the deceased’s accounts because she cannot obtain a death certificate as the Auckland coroners are too overworked to hold an inquest. 
This is the new regime announced with such fervour and fanfare by the Labour Party last year. So while the Labour Party is concerned with featherbedding the Human Rights Commission and spending money on new procedures and processes the everyday cares of New Zealanders are simply ignored. 
Finally I want to say a word or two about Dr Cullen whose performance in the House last week was pitiful. That our Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance in an important tax debate had nothing better to contribute to this House than petty and catty discourse about people’s ties brings deep shame on the New Zealand Parliament. Mark my words: this is his last Budget. His political career is going nowhere just as his academic career was going nowhere upon his election to Parliament in 1981. 
Perhaps the whole purpose of that horrible man’s tenure as Minister of Finance has been simply to serve as a warning to others: it does not matter how smart people are and it does not matter how smart they think they are; if they do not listen to others and do not pay attention to the everyday hopes and aspirations of their fellow countrymen then history will judge them to be a failure. Last night my good friend Mr Auchinvole referred to a letter written by Oliver Cromwell to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland in 1650 and I endorse everything he said.