Foss Craig: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Foss Craig: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:663;Page:11427] 
2. 
CRAIG FOSS (National—Tukituki) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: What reports has he received showing signs that the economy is rebalancing towards exports and investment and away from borrowing consumption and property speculation? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 This rebalancing of the economy is one of the main goals of Budget 2010. There are some encouraging statistics but we need to keep in mind that any rebalancing of the New Zealand economy is a long-term goal not necessarily able to be achieved easily in the short term. Last week Statistics New Zealand reported that New Zealand posted an annual trade surplus of $161 million in the year to April—the first trade surplus recorded since July 2002. The trade surplus for the month of April alone was $656 million or 16.5 percent of the value of New Zealand’s exports. This compares with an average April trade deficit of 0.6 percent of exports for the previous 10 years. However as I said the figures for 1 month or even 1 year will not deal with the long-run problem of imbalance in the New Zealand economy. 
Craig Foss 
: Why is it important that the economic recovery is built around exporting and investment rather than consumption debt and excessive Government spending? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: It is very important because that is how we will undo the damage done by the previous Government with its 10 years of mismanagement and a squandered decade in which it could have put— 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker you have given many rulings on these sorts of things. This question comes from the Government itself so therefore the Minister must have had notice of it. It is inexplicable that he would start off with his answer being entirely about the previous Government. We have had an election National is in charge now and it should answer on the basis of its policies. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There will be silence while I consider this point of order. The dilemma I have I say to the member is that the Minister was asked why the claimed rebalancing of the economy was important. It is difficult for me to rule the Minister out of order in referring to how he sees things that have gone on in respect of the New Zealand economy. What he must not do is to make any allegations about what the Labour Party’s current policy may be and then criticise that. He must not do that but I think the Minister is within his rights to comment as he sees fit on the recent economic situation in New Zealand. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Further to your ruling on that and in view of Speaker’s ruling 145/7 which holds that “The Government can answer only for its own intentions and has no responsibility for the Opposition.” would your ruling still hold it to be true that the matters to which the Minister referred were wrong in fact as well as not being within his own purview? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I appreciate that the member is raising a genuine point. If the Opposition believes that anything that the Minister says is wrong Opposition members can question him on the answer that he gives. The idea of supplementary questions is to test the accuracy and validity of a Minister’s answer. So when the Minister—it appears that he might do this—comments on what has happened in the past that gives Opposition members free opportunity to question him on anything he says in that answer. 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: It is important to rebalance the economy because of the damage done by the mismanagement of the previous Government which left behind an economy where the tradable sector had shrunk by 15 percent and the non-tradable sector had grown by 10 percent. Jobs that are based on borrowing imports housing speculation and poor management of Government finances are not sustainable as many New Zealanders have found out. We want to create sustainable jobs and higher family incomes. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In reference to the previous point of order the matter does get somewhat more complicated. If one listened to that answer one heard that it was not simply a recitation of matters that the Minister believes are important but that he was giving his own view of or his own spin on what he thinks of those issues. In view of the Speaker’s ruling that says he has responsibility only for the Government and not the Opposition it is not possible for Opposition members to question the Minister about Opposition affairs. We can question him only about Government responsibility which means that we cannot ask him in logic a supplementary question about matters for which he is not responsible. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The honourable member needs to be aware that the Opposition is no longer in Government. The Minister was commenting on the economic environment that he inherited as the Minister. That is no longer the property of the current Opposition; Labour was in Government then. The Minister did not make any comment on the Opposition’s current policies. I listened carefully; he made no comment on the Opposition’s current policies. But I believe the Minister is responsible for dealing with the economic situation that the Government inherited as he on the Government’s behalf sees it. He gave some facts in his answer—what he claimed to be facts; I heard some information about the tradable versus non-tradable sectors of the economy—but if he was wrong then members of the Opposition can question him on the accuracy of that answer. Supplementary questions are there to test a Minister’s answer. I listened carefully and the Minister made no comment about the Opposition’s current policies. But in respect of the activities of the previous Government which the Minister has had to confront as the Minister in this Government I believe it is legitimate for the Minister to make comment on those although he can be tested on the accuracy of what he says. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think it is important to get some clarity for the Opposition on this matter. Are you ruling that we can use our supplementary questions to ask Ministers in this Government about the effect of policies of the previous Government of which they were not members and for which they had no responsibility? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It is very simple. Where a Minister in his or her answer covers issues that relate to the previous Government Opposition members are perfectly at liberty to question the Minister about any aspect of his or her answer—in this case his answer. That is absolutely within the Standing Orders. The idea of supplementary questions is to test the answer that a Minister has given. Often Opposition members will not be happy necessarily with the answers that they are given and the idea of having supplementary questions available to members is that if they believe a Minister has said something incorrect in an answer everything that the Minister included in his or her answer is available for further questioning even if the matter relates to the previous administration. 
Craig Foss 
: What steps were taken in Budget 2010 to help the economy to grow faster and ensure that more of the growth comes from all the right places? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: The Budget took several measures to boost growth in the productive parts of the economy. They included reforming the taxation system in order to put the right incentives into the economy and help to keep skilled Kiwis in New Zealand; investing in New Zealand’s future through a significant boost in science and innovation and in infrastructure; continuing to get debt and deficits under control; and investing record sums in priority front-line public services. 
Hon Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is not about the sound system; this is about the constant heckling from the deputy leader of the Labour Party and Trevor Mallard who just set up a wail across the House. You are closer than me to the Minister who is giving the answer so you can probably hear him but I can assure you that it was a struggle for me to hear the answer. I believe that all members of Parliament deserve to hear the answer and to not be subjected to a constant stream of barracking across the front benches. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: The answer that the Minister seeks in his point of order is in the hands of the Government: if Ministers give answers that attack a political party and are provocative then of course it is just natural that there will be a response from Opposition members. If the Minister of Finance was able to get up explain his own policies and give succinct answers based on what he is doing right now not on what happened 10 20 or 30 years ago there would be a much quieter reception. We are interested in his policies. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will not take more of the time of the House on this matter. The Hon Rodney Hide’s point of order is a fair point of order; it was very difficult to hear because of the level of interjection. I say to the Hon Darren Hughes that I accept that the Opposition is not happy with the answer that was given. I absolutely accept that; there is no question about that. But to counter that by way of just excessive interjection is not the best way of countering it. The best way is to attack the Minister with sharp questions that test whether he has misrepresented in the member’s view the achievements of the previous Government. If he has done that then members should question him in a way that shows that he is misrepresenting the achievements of the previous Government rather than just interjecting on the Minister. I am sure that the Hon David Cunliffe will do that. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: In view of the zero net debt the record low unemployment and the longest post-war period of economic expansion that his Government inherited from the previous Government is he satisfied with Treasury’s assessment of the growth impact of his Budget which cost $15 billion in tax rebates and fails to scrape up over 7 years as much as 1 percent of additional economic growth? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: When Labour Opposition members understand the damage that they did to the economy in the last 5 years that they were in Government then we will bother to have an economic debate with them. 
Craig Foss 
: What policy approaches would put the growth in exports and investments at risk and mortgage the future of New Zealand families? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: The kinds of approaches that would put that growth at risk would be increasing personal income taxes and in particular getting back on the treadmill of making endless promises to anyone who asks for money and thereby running up large external debts. New Zealand already owes the world $170 billion. Every policy that I hear from members on the other side of the House would make that significantly worse. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Is it his opinion that the decade of incompetence included incompetence in allowing him to take half a million dollars by pretending to live in Dipton? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: No but I tell that member that I spend many hours of my day on cleaning up behind his incompetence.