Clark David: New Zealand Business Number Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeClark David: New Zealand Business Number Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 12 April 2016. Volume:713;Page:10432. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North): We will be supporting this bill but we do it with significant reservation. In the Committee stage I moved an amendment to an amendment put forward by Ria Bond from New Zealand First which was an excellent amendment to ensure that this bill actually delivered on what it promised. It was a sensible amendment and I believe that my amendment to the amendment made it even more sensible.Put in plain language it was a small change to the legislation that would have ensured that the Government does implement this bill as the language in the bill suggests: that the Government makes sure that there is a single number for businesses to deal with Government so that when businesses come to deal with Government whether it be with the Immigration Service or with ACC or with the Inland Revenue Department (IRD) or with whoever they want to have to deal with—or might not want to have to deal with but do—they would have a single number that they could put forward and say: “Look in my dealings with Government you will find all of my information under this number. Here is the number. Now can we talk?”.That is what this bill purports to want to do. Unfortunately from the very start there have been doubts about whether the Government can deliver on this. In the Committee stage that amendment was put forward to test the Government’s mettle—to say: is the Government really committed to achieving this outcome of having a single number for business to deal with the Government? The amendment said that the Government will put this into play in 2 years’ time.The opportunity of course was there for the Government to say: “Look Mr Clark. You’re being a little unrealistic. Let’s make it 3 years’ time. Or let’s make it 4 years’ time.” But no the Government rejected it outright. It did not want a time frame around ensuring that this policy was in place. And so what we learnt from that is that a lot of this is window dressing.The intention is good—the intention is good—that there should be a single number for business to have to deal with the Government. There is a lot of red tape for business and it does not take a member very long in this Parliament or very many visits to business to discover that there is a lot of frustration in dealing with the Government.The Government talks a big game but frequently it is inflexible and it introduces red tape. Under this Government we have seen changes around child support legislation that have put additional burdens on employers. We have seen it trying to introduce tax for car-parks and other measures. We know that putting burdens on business is easy; taking it off is hard in the modern world. We agree with the intention but we share the doubts of the likes of Federated Farmers. Federated Farmers said they were concerned that the list of agencies involved initially did not include WorkSafe with which of course they deal. The list does not include Immigration New Zealand with which of course they deal. They were concerned equally that local government may be considered to be brought in under the business number too. But no moves have been made in that regard.So we are disappointed on this side of the House that the Government has not fully committed to this ideal. We understand that behind the scenes yes there are some tensions with the IRD because the IRD is concerned about data security and the failures of the Government in terms of privacy and information that is important to business and to individuals. We understand that and yet it is the Government’s problem to solve. It is solely responsible for running Government. Its members are the people who can commit resource and who can commit to talking with the officials to make sure that these problems are ironed out to make sure that the system is simple and to make sure that businesses do not have to get tied up in red tape every time they come to Government. But it does not seem willing to do it. And you have to ask why. You have to ask why ultimately.It boils down in my view to the fact that this Government is more concerned with tilting the playing field towards big business. It does not care about small business. We have seen year after year fewer small businesses created under this Government than were created under the last Labour Government. It seems pretty evident from the statistics that the Government is not concerned about the majority of business owners in New Zealand. It talks the talk but it will not walk it. It will not pass legislation that actually delivers on the promise in this bill. The Government will not even set a time frame. It will not even say: “In 5 years’ time there will be a single number that you have to deal with. We will commit to getting our software upgraded or whatever it takes to make sure that businesses have a simple straightforward way into Government.” Instead it says: “We like the idea. We will put it on the never-never.” That is what this bill achieves.It will probably take a Labour Government to come in and sort this out dare I say because I think it will still be a problem in a few years’ time. What is worse is that this will be an additional cost on the Government in the short term. That is something that business will be prepared to wear if we get to a single number in a reasonable period of time. But in the interim businesses will be forced to take on yet another number. And this is something that was warned about in the regulatory impact statement that was put out by Treasury which the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment worked on which was put out before the bill even got into the House. The officials knew the problem was there but perhaps Steven Joyce’s ears were blocked—I do not know. I do not know why he did not hear this advice. I do not know why the Government did not move behind the scenes to ensure that the processes would be in place to implement this legislation to make sure that the Government could deliver on its promise to business to make it easier to deal with the Government. This is a lost opportunity and we still hope that Government members will find it within themselves to get there to make sure that there is a single business number within a reasonable frame of time.Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand told us in its submission “that the benefits for businesses may be overstated … [without] prompt and broad integration by government agencies”. What “prompt and broad” means I do not know. I put forward 2 years; the Government could have said 3 years. But prompt I think means getting this done within 5 years certainly. I would be interested in whether other Government members can outline a time frame in which they expect this business number to come into effect—one that cannot be laughed down in the House. In the meantime businesses must collect another number—yet another number—to deal with the Government.So slow implementation across the Government will carry this cost to business. There is no way to avoid that. What could be avoided is this being put on the never-never. The Government can plan towards that. It can plan towards investing in its own infrastructure to make sure that it has the capacity to deliver on the promise of this bill eventually. I look forward I hope in a future bill that comes to this House to some kind of an indication as to how that is going to be achieved. It may be through the Budget process—all may be revealed. There may be a secret plan going on behind the scenes. There may be hamsters running in the wheels of power generating a plan to deliver on this bill. I surely hope so because right now it comes nowhere near. It is only a promise at this stage.And the problem too is if businesses lose faith in the ability of the Government ever to deliver on this they will hold off on getting that extra number. Businesses will wait and critical mass will be hard to achieve within the government system also. Officials will be doing two tasks: dealing with the existing business number and with the new business number. So if businesses hold off because they do not have faith that the Government can deliver on this we have our greatest problem still. So I am hopeful that the Government is working on this behind the scenes to deliver in the Budget a solution to the problem of the business number that it is creatinghere.This is a Government that is failing on every front with business. Let us face it: it set itself in its glorious Business Growth Agenda a target of getting exports to 40 percent of GDP. It has not come close. It had it at 30 percent—it is going down. It is going down and it is projected to go down further. This is a Government that is failing on every front. It tried to negotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership—it went off course. It failed to even ask for protections for our housing so that we could protect our economic sovereignty to make decisions in the national interest.This is a Government that is off beam on economic issues. It is failing businesses and here in the short term at least it is adding more red tape to businesses with the promise that it will go in the longer term. I challenge this Government opposite to put down a time frame in which this will be achieved and to stump up with the resources to achieve it. Without that all we are doing here is putting an additional impost on business.It should be easy for business to deal with the Government. There is no excuse for this dilly-dallying for this window dressing. The intention is good. We will support the bill but for goodness’ sake we would like to see from the Government resource and a plan to get us to the single number that is promised in this legislation.