Dean Jacqui: Budget Debate 
Dean Jacqui: Budget Debate 
[Volume:647;Page:16439] 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Otago) 
: 
 I ask my colleagues to remind me of who said we could not have tax cuts because it would be fiscally irresponsible. Who was that? 
Hon Members 
: Dr Cullen. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: That is right; it was Dr Cullen. Who said we could not have tax cuts because we would then have to cut back on essential services? Who said that? 
Hon Members 
: Dr Cullen. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: Was that Dr Cullen again? And I ask colleagues to remind me—because I am struggling with this—of who just a couple of days ago announced in the Budget that the Government would in fact be having tax cuts. Who was that? 
Hon Members 
: Michael Cullen. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: It would not be Michael Cullen would it? Goodness me—I ask my colleagues whether it is election year this year. 
Does that not just show us that this Government— 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: I wonder whether there’s a tax cut next year. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: I ask my colleagues is there a tax cut next year? 
Hon Members 
: No. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: What is the matter? Is it not an election year next year? 
Hon Member 
: Tax cuts. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: So I ask my colleagues how much are we going to get out of this tax cut? 
Hon Member 
: $16. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: Now what does that buy? 
Hon Members 
: A block of cheese. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: This Government cannot be trusted. This “block of cheese” Budget this pork-barrel Budget is here not because Dr Cullen thinks the country needs it but because Dr Cullen desperately desperately wants to be re-elected. Well the news is all bad for him. 
This Government does not in any way live up to its promises. This Government does not live up to the hype and of course that is not news to us. But let us just consider this. Let us just think back to last year’s Speech from the Throne when the Prime Minister uttered the word “sustainability” 33 times. The Prime Minister uttered that magic word 33 times. Man it sounded good to the Government members. Helen Clark was the New Zealand eco-heroine. She was the world-leading Prime Minister the climate change - busting caring Prime Minister the Government leader. Now there have been plaudits from all around the world. The United Nations called her all sorts of wonderful things and in due course of course the emissions trading legislation and the Biofuel Bill to back it all up were introduced into Parliament. This was a Government the Labour members were trying to tell us that was prepared not only to talk the talk but to be a world leader in climate change and sustainability—33 times she said the word “sustainability.” So against all that gung-ho environmentalism one of the disappointing aspects of this year’s Budget was the real downgrading of the Government’s commitment to sustainability and its commitment to the environment. 
Nobody said that more loudly and more clearly than Dr Cullen when he gave his Budget speech and he said these words: “Sustainability is at the heart of a range of policies including the Fast Forward Fund the water programme of action the Emissions Trading Scheme …”. Well the Fast Forward fund is the repackaging of some operational funding all wrapped up in a nice bow and of course it is unsustainable over time. The emissions trading scheme is an embarrassment. The emissions trading scheme is in full retreat and following it will be the Biofuel Bill which of course did not even rate a mention. And what happened to the much-vaunted Sustainable Water Programme of Action? Is the Government finally acknowledging what a senior policy Government official from the Ministry for the Environment spelt out last year at a major water conference in Rotorua when he acknowledged—a Ministry for the Environment senior policy analyst—that the Sustainable Water Programme of Action really should be labelled the “Sustainable Water Programme of Inaction”? 
I tell members that I was at that conference and the people who heard those words from a senior policy adviser of the Government were absolutely gobsmacked. There was a senior ministry official bagging the Government—a senior policy man bagging the Government. That pronouncement went down like an absolute lead balloon with the 400 professional people at that conference as did of course the reputation of the Government. So that small moment—that small comment—on behalf of a Government official showed just how uncommitted the Government really is to the environment. 
Then there is the Ministry for the Environment’s “New Zealand. A valuable body of water.” promotion. Members might remember that—the pictures in magazines of fully clothed men standing waist-deep in water. Do members remember that? 
Jo Goodhew 
: My electorate chair! 
JACQUI DEAN 
: Jo’s electorate chair; it cost a fortune. The purpose of that expensive exercise on behalf of the Ministry for the Environment is to show that the general public value water—as though the general public do not value water? Does the Government think that people are stupid? Hundreds of thousands of dollars of our money were used to tell us that we value water. That is the Ministry for the Environment and the Labour-led Government’s Sustainable Water Programme of Action and it is a huge example of a complete waste of money. 
Debate interrupted.