Newman Muriel: Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee 
Newman Muriel: Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16580] 
Dr MURIEL NEWMAN (Deputy Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I take pleasure in rising on behalf of the ACT party to speak on this Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. Because I am not on the Finance and Expenditure Committee I have a number of questions that I would like to ask the Minister in the chair David Cunliffe. 
I am aware that the United Future party has put forward some amendments to the tax bill that go for lower taxes I understand. I want to clarify whether United Future has put in an amendment to introduce capital gains tax because I know that Mr Copeland has a particular interest in having a capital gains tax in New Zealand. Maybe the Minister would like to take a call to clarify that. I know he has been in contact with the Minister of Finance over this issue. Hearing from the Minister would put our minds at rest because it would be a change for New Zealand to have a capital gains tax. 
I ask the Minister also to address a second issue which is one that the Hon Richard Prebble raised in his contribution. It is what the Government’s definition of a Maori is. Clause 26 “Election to become a Maori authority” states that “A person who elects to become a Maori authority becomes a Maori authority—” but then it does not appear to define what it is one has to do to become a Maori authority. I think many New Zealanders have real concerns about legislation based on race being in place. This bill is cementing that in place yet there is no definition. I remember that this question of what actually a Maori is has been raised a number of times in the period that I have been in Parliament. For voting purposes if one says that one feels like a Maori one can go on the Maori roll. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: How does the Minister feel? 
Dr MURIEL NEWMAN 
: Yes how does the Minister feel about that sort of definition? Maybe the Minister would like to clarify whether if any authority decided for the purposes of income tax that it wanted to be a Maori authority there any rules regulations or provisions that it would have to abide by or is it OK just to tick the box and say: “I feel Maori because then I can get a lower tax rate.”? 
I think this is a serious issue. This is the Committee stage and there is a Minister in the chair. The purpose of having the Minister in the chair is to address issues raised in the Committee stage; otherwise this debate is a farce. So far I have not heard the Minister take a call. This is a serious issue. Either he knows the answer and is refusing to tell it to Opposition members or else he does not know the answer. But he has his officials sitting right next to him so I would suggest to the Minister that if he does not know—it sounds like he does not—he should ask his officials seek some advice then explain to the Committee whether an authority has to do more than simply feel that it is Maori to be able to qualify for and gain a lower tax rate. 
 The ACT party did put in a minority report that advocated a low flat tax. I remind the Minister that Treasury produced a paper late last year which came to light this year that explained that if the Labour Government simply gave back to families its surplus—the amount of money it overtaxes New Zealand working families—we could reduce our tax rate to 20c in the dollar. Let us just imagine the incentive it would bring to New Zealand to have a 20c flat tax rate; most of the provisions of this bill we could simply chuck in the rubbish bin. Our tax laws are so complicated because the taxes that this Government has put in place have made taxation in New Zealand more complex still. The average family pays 46 percent of its wages in taxes.