Tremain Chris: Taxation (Annual Rates Savings Investment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — First Reading 
Tremain Chris: Taxation (Annual Rates Savings Investment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:631;Page:3451] 
CHRIS TREMAIN (National—Napier) 
: 
 It is interesting to hear Mr Shane Jones speak of possums caught in headlights. That was a good way to end his speech. In my speech today I will focus on some possums caught in the headlights. I will address Part 1 “Annual rates of income tax for 2006-07 tax year” and Part 2 “Amendments to Income Tax Act 2004” which focuses on offshore investment and shares in collective investment vehicles. But I do not want to pass up the opportunity to have a look at that annual taxation level in Part 1 which is a fairly brief part I have to say—in fact so brief that the explanatory note states only: “The rates that will apply are those in schedule 1 of the Income Tax Act 2004.” In short it means there is no change. 
I would like to take a moment to reflect on Michael Cullen’s maiden speech when looking at this bill. It is interesting to reflect on the goals mentioned in one’s maiden speech. Earlier today he mentioned the word “arrogance” and in that respect I want to quote from his maiden speech: “I am proud of the fact that my secondary education was not paid for by the taxpayers of New Zealand but by the farmers of Canterbury and Hawke’s Bay. I ripped them off for 5 years then and I shall get stuck into them again in the next few years”. I say: “Congratulations Dr Cullen. You’ve done damn well in that respect.” That reinforces his commitment to the annual rates: there is no change—there is no relief in taxation rates or indexation rates for farmers. In fact farmers were not mentioned throughout the entire Budget. But in terms of lack of taxation relief Dr Cullen has ripped off not only farmers but also police nurses engineers fitters and turners stevedores watersiders seafarers printers customs officers teachers flight attendants— 
R Doug Woolerton 
: All Labour voters. 
CHRIS TREMAIN 
: That is the point I am making. The list includes writers firefighters paramedics and lecturers. They are all hard-working Kiwis but include many of those whom Dr Cullen purports to represent. They will not receive any break in their tax rates over the next year. Those people like farmers are looking for incentives to get ahead. But what has been provided? Nothing! They are taxpayers—the very people who allow us to have a safety net who allow us to have a welfare system. Without them it would be very difficult to provide a growing safety net. 
They are the people with true transferable skills. In case Dr Cullen does not realise it we are now living in a global economy where those skills are transferable. For those people—watersiders seafarers—their standard of living is critical. We do live in a wonderful country; there is nothing surer. I am as patriotic as anybody but I want to be able to provide at least a similar standard of living to that of Australia in order to retain those people whose skills are critical to our nation. The facts are that our living standards are not moving ahead as they should be if we were to be truly patriotic about this country and about keeping those key people here. The fact is that wage rates in Australia in 2000 were 20 percent ahead of ours and are now 33 percent ahead of where we are now. It is those things that are taking people overseas. 
Helen Clark tells us she wants wage rates like Australia’s—well she did in 1999. She made this comment in an address in 1999 at the New Zealand Trade Centre: “I for one prefer New Zealand to have rates of growth and living standards akin to”—wait for it!—“Australia.” Well what the heck is she doing about it? She is doing nothing. Wage rates are continuing to rise yet the bill we are debating does nothing about that. When the Opposition raises questions about growing wage rates members opposite say: “Bugger off then.”. They sit there and wave goodbye. Far from being unpatriotic members on this side of the House set strong aspirations for those key people I have mentioned—for our seafarers printers and many other union members whose skills are necessary for this nation. Helen Clark says she wants the same—at least she did in 1999. I shall quote her again from that time when she said she was not prepared to stand back and see the best and brightest leave taking their ideas and even their businesses with them. 
Brian Connell 
: Who said that? 
CHRIS TREMAIN 
: Helen Clark in a speech to the Contractors Federation conference. Can members believe it? 
Where is the action now? We know that in 2003 10000 left; in 2004 15000 left; in 2005 21000 left. They waved goodbye. But members opposite say: “If you don’t like it here goodbye! See you later.” They wave goodbye to our hard workers like policemen printers and seafarers then they tell Opposition members that we are being unpatriotic. Forget it! How many people will it take to leave for the Government to acknowledge there is a real problem? 
Peter Costello has made it a whole lot harder. That man understands that providing incentives for those key people is important. He knows what it takes to grow an economy and to provide the very best services possible. It takes hard workers who want incentives to get ahead—and there were 21000 of them in 2005. Peter Costello is standing at the gates of Sydney airport with his arms wide open saying: “Come on in.” Meanwhile this Government is saying: “If you don’t like it goodbye.” I would like to remind this Government about the parable of the goose that laid the golden egg: the Government should not forget that those key people we are talking about—policemen seafarers and printers—are important to this country and that they need incentives to get ahead. 
Let us have a quick look at the Australian Government. For the fourth year in a row it has introduced massive across-the-board tax cuts of A$36.7 billion which in New Zealand is equivalent to $45 billion. Those cuts are a massive incentive. But let us not focus too much on tax cuts. What tax cuts do is allow wage growth and people are going to Australia for better wages. 
Michael Cullen and Helen Clark say there is no room for lower taxes even though there is an $8.5 billion surplus. I will give members a couple of quotes from Mr Cullen. In September 1999 he said that New Zealand would move to match Australia on company tax but only when conditions allowed it. I would like to know when conditions will allow it. He has set a few goals: “Well maybe when the operating surplus gets high enough.” That surplus is $8.5 billion. Then he changed the goal to when the operating balance excluding revaluations and accounting changes got high enough. That balance is $7 billion. Then he changed the goal again and said not to worry about the operating balance excluding revaluations and accounting changes but to worry about it only when the cash surplus got big enough. That cash surplus is 1.5 billion. I want to know when we get to the point where we can provide incentives for hard-working Kiwis to get ahead. It is not in this bill. 
So I say congratulations to Mr Cullen. He has succeeded in relation to his maiden speech comments about farmers—that he had ripped them off for 5 years while he was at school and that he would get stuck into them over the years ahead. He has managed to do that to farmers and he has also managed to do it to police nurses engineers fitters and turners stevedores watersiders printers customs officers teachers flight attendants writers firefighters paramedics and lecturers—to all hard-working Kiwis.