Maharey Steve: Budget Debate 
Maharey Steve: Budget Debate 
[Volume:631;Page:3354] 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to follow the 50th speaker in this debate—a man who came from nowhere and after 2 days as deputy leader went straight back. I have to say to Dr Smith I notice that if anyone is tired in the House it must be him because his memory is I think a little faulty. The 1990s I say for that member’s edification were 9 long years of absolute and utter decline in this country. That member sat on this side of the House for the first 3 years he will remember and then for the next 6 years basically like most National members he begged to be shot. That is how bad it was to be a National member in this House during that period of time. 
Those members should think about the health system and about the fact that National drove the unemployment rate to 11.9 percent. They should think about the fact that every single region in this country was shrinking and people were wondering who would be left to turn the lights off after National was finished with them. In the end the only thing that saved National from utter destruction was that it was defeated by this Government and its members were able to go off and lick their wounds and start to think about what they would do in the future. I tell Dr Smith that the 1990s will be remembered as an utter disaster—a shame—for National and that is why its members are still sitting on the Opposition benches listening to Dr Michael Cullen deliver his—not first not second not third not fourth not fifth not sixth but—seventh Budget in a row. 
That is why Dr Smith is sitting over on the other side listening to the seventh Budget—a Budget that has delivered on the commitments made in the last election. We do it because we say we will do it and we have delivered in this Budget. It was a Labour Budget that illustrated our values. Ordinary New Zealand families are actually getting back more from tax than they paid. No one could give them a tax cut bigger than the one they are getting from Working for Families now. They are getting back more than they are paying now from Working for Families yet the rocket scientist Dr Nick Smith comes in here and asks why we do not give a tax cut. People are already getting back more from tax than they are paying. The Budget is one that New Zealand can have only by having a progressive Government comprising Progressive Labour New Zealand First and Greens—these people here who believe in investing in this country. They are not prepared to allow a deficit to build up around issues like health and education; they want to see a continuing high level of investment in the things New Zealanders voted for at the last election. I know it hurts Dr Smith to hear that but that is what they voted for. 
But from the other side what do we get? It is a predictable reaction: “Lets cut taxes.” they say. National has only one policy—that is all it can say. It says for people not to invest but to cash up all the gains—but gains gained when? Were they gained under National in the 1990s? Did we have money in the bank when National was in Government? Were we as Dr Smith said in the black? No! We got into the black after 6 hard years of work by members now on this side of the House—the parties that made up the Labour-led Government during those 6 years—but the National Party wants to cash it up. That is the kind of mentality that National has: “Let us not invest; let us cash it up. We have some money after 6 years of the other side doing some work.”—so National wants to go and spend it on tax cuts. That is what it wants to do. Then because National cannot do that—being on the other side of the House—it says that New Zealanders should go to Australia. 
I want people to think about that line for a second. Can anybody imagine an Australian politician—no matter what the provocation; no matter how good it is in Tonga New Zealand Hong Kong or America—campaigning on the theme of their people going to another country? Can anyone imagine Labor the Democrats the Greens the Nationals or the Liberals campaigning for Australians to go somewhere else? That is why New Zealanders are looking at the National Party right now and saying that patriotism is not part of the value set of that party. 
 The National Party does not stand for New Zealand. It is a little like saying we do not think the All Blacks are doing very well so they all should go and play for the Wallabies. They lost in Paris and that is no good so they should all go and play for the Wallabies. because somehow they have a better trainer or whatever. An Australian politician would never do that. An Australian politician would rather eat a dingo than recommend another country to live in. Frankly I would rather eat a tuatara than recommend a New Zealander go and live somewhere else. But National members do not believe that. They are now running a campaign with billboards about people on this side of the Tasman leaving the country and going over there. Well I have to say those members have just turned themselves into what we always knew—that is the biggest joke possible. 
The second thing is they tell people to go across the Tasman because they will pay a lower tax rate. But the top tax rate in Australia is 45 percent. It is 39 percent in this country. The company tax rate is 33 percent in Australia and 30 percent in New Zealand. GST is 12.5 percent here and 10 percent over there. Do we pay stamp duty when we sell a house? No we do not but those who go to Australia can enjoy paying 2.5 percent in Sydney for example. Do we pay a Medicare levy in this country? No we do not. But across the Tasman they pay 1.5 percent of income. Does any employer in this country pay a payroll tax? 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Not yet but Minister Cullen is working on it. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Mr Smith would know because he knows a lot about business. He has been in business I understand. Employers here do not pay a payroll tax but in Australia they pay 3.6 to 6.8 percent. For accident compensation we pay 1 percent on average or less than 1 percent but they pay 2.47 percent. Paid parental leave in this country is 14 weeks but have a guess how many weeks—how many days how many minutes even—they get in Australia. They do not get any—none at all. Tertiary fees on average are $3736 but in Australia one can enjoy paying just under $5000. In terms of superannuation could a well-paid man like Dr Smith retire and look forward to superannuation and Bondi Beach—which he used to think was something done in the bedroom until last week but now he knows that Bondi Beach exists? What he now knows is that if he goes across there as a well-off person he will not get any superannuation because it is asset tested. In this country superannuation is universal. 
The National Party does not tell people that. It tells them simplistically to compare something that advantages the National Party because it wants all New Zealanders to love Australia and not their own country. So it tells them things that are not true. It makes comparisons that are false. It pulls the wool over New Zealanders’ eyes and says: “Why don’t you go across to Australia and get a lower tax rate?”—whereas they will not. That is the bottom line. That is what is wrong with the whole National Party argument. Instead of coming clean and saying that the real choice for New Zealanders 6 years after they have begun to grow their economy again and get some real expenditure on the kinds of things that might make a real difference—like health education research and development roads and all the things that will make this country strong—and instead of arguing how to make the pie bigger how to make us richer how to make us stronger in this century so we may well pull ahead of other countries all over the world as we are beginning to do National wants to cash up the gains we have already made. 
That is not a strategy for investment. That is not a strategy for saying that we know what the real drivers of growth are—education investment in health infrastructure strong investment in the environment making sure our kids have the skills making sure our firms are globally competitive. That money does not come from putting individual tax cuts back into the pockets of people when we need the money to invest. That is the simple choice. Right now in Australia the same debate is going on. The business sector is saying they did not want those kinds of tax cuts because the drivers of growth come from public investment in roads health education and infrastructure. We know that is where the drivers of growth come from. That is what our Government is doing. That is why this country has grown year on year for 6 years. That is why as we go into an economic cycle we are going to ride this through because we have invested in making the country stronger. New Zealanders know that. They believe in their country. They believe in the Government. That is why they put us here and that is why we are paying them back in spades—with an outstanding Budget by Michael Cullen.