Dunne Peter: Debate on Budget Policy Statement 
Dunne Peter: Debate on Budget Policy Statement 
[Volume:645;Page:14851] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I begin by responding to some comments made by an earlier speaker about the recent forecast figures in terms of overall revenue. It is not correct to say that the most recent set of statements indicated a $4 billion shortfall in tax revenue. What those statements indicated was that the largest contributor to the shortfall was a drop-off in earnings on some of the equities that we have invested in internationally through bodies like the Earthquake Commission the Accident Compensation Corporation etc. The actual tax component of those figures was approximately between $400 million to $700 million dollars. To put that into its correct context in terms of overall forecasting that is within the general margin of error. As far as we are concerned the good news is that the tax cut programme that the Government has committed itself to as announced in this year’s Budget can proceed and can proceed on a staged basis. 
As someone who was the Minister of Revenue the last time this country had personal tax cuts which was over 12 years ago I am particularly keen to see personal tax cuts advance now over a 3-year period in order to build on the business tax cuts that were introduced in last year’s Budget. They will give New Zealanders a dividend for a number of the costs that they have borne over the years of economic restructuring and they are the fruits of the progress of that restructuring that we have seen in the last few years. I am looking forward to what the Minister of Finance may outline in that regard because the case is overwhelming. New Zealanders are increasingly saying: “We cannot carry on paying more and more and getting less and less in return and we expect some dividend from the Government for the contribution that we have made.” On a rolling basis tax cuts would be a very powerful signal in that regard. 
There is another lesson to be learnt from our recent experience. What New Zealand tends to periodically do is go through a process of reducing taxes and then put them aside as having done that to be forgotten for a time in the future. A moment ago I said that the last time we had personal tax cuts was 1996; it is not good enough to have to wait over a decade for the next round. The business tax cuts which take effect in just a few weeks’ time are the first business tax cuts in nearly two decades. It is not good enough to have to wait 20 years between business tax cuts; rather we need to be embarking on a programme of smaller and more regular cuts so that New Zealanders can keep in touch with the rest of the international community. That is certainly something United Future is keen to focus on and will be looking to see achieved in this year’s Budget. 
I will talk about a couple of other issues that are important to New Zealanders as a whole on which there is the scope this year to make some significant change if the political will is there. Every day we hear stories of waiting lists for elective surgery in the public hospital sector. We have various scandals in some of our smaller district health boards. Yet at the moment around 150000—over half of all—elective surgical procedures are carried out each year in the private sector and only about 2 percent of the total of those procedures are funded by public hospitals. We have the absurd situation of waiting lists in the public sector and underutilisation of capacity in the private sector. A country like New Zealand with just over 4 million people is simply not big enough to run and sustain two competing health systems in the way we do at the moment. There needs to be integration; there needs to be far more cooperation. What we ought to be doing—and the only thing stopping us at the moment is ideology—is utilising the overcapacity in the private sector to fund some of those shortages and reduce those waiting lists in the public sector. That is not an ideological statement; it is actually a statement of fact and common sense and through astute utilisation of management and planning it can be attained. We see that as being a far more productive way ahead than the continuation of this artificial division we have got into in recent years. The upshot of that is that the public sector would then be enabled to focus on the high-end medical procedures—the very specialist acute surgery the breakthrough research and so on and so forth that keep us at the top end. But we cannot do that while we have the problems we have at the moment. So we want to see significant steps taken this year to allow for greater integration of the public and private health sectors. 
This is not about privatising the health system or any of that sort of rhetoric; it is simply about ensuring that New Zealanders get access to the operations they need at the time they need them. You know if we look at the statements from the Ministry of Health about its expectations and about what a New Zealander can look forward to in terms of elective surgical procedures we see that those are not bold ringing or inspiring; it is simply a statement that it will endeavour to get a person the surgery he or she requires within a 6-month period or if it cannot do that it will explain to that person when he or she might be getting that surgery. If people are hanging out there for serious operations—if they have painful hip or knee joints requiring replacement—and are being told that hospitals will try to do them within 6 months and if they cannot then be told when that might be happening it is hardly a ringing endorsement. United Future says that New Zealanders deserve better than that particularly elderly and vulnerable New Zealanders who do not have the luxury of saying they will queue-jump by going private. We ought to be enabling them to get access to their surgery in a timely manner and we ought to be doing that by utilising that overcapacity in the private sector. 
Christopher Finlayson 
: Don’t look at us; look at them. 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: It is not a matter of looking at either side of the House. I know that I have support on the Opposition side of the House for this policy but it is certainly something that can be achieved and ought to be achieved regardless of party lines. This is simply common sense not ideology. 
I will say a couple of other things because they come into the same category. Earlier today there was some criticism of the Families Commission because it announced its intention to undertake a $500000 programme—and I get very angry with our total fixation always on dollars rather than on quality—about promoting parenting. Parenting is the most important task any one of us can take on. It does need to be affirmed and it needs to be affirmed loud and clear and often and clear. Parents will tell us—they have told the commission they have told the Government and they have told every single one of us—that they feel undervalued they feel under-appreciated. The best way we can strengthen and enhance families in New Zealand and break down the cycle of dysfunction that so many are suffering from is to enhance parenting to boost parents and give them a pat on the back for what they do and to make it clear that we as a Parliament and a Government stand alongside them in that important responsibility. So I applaud the commission for the work that it is doing and I hope that as a result of this year’s Budget it will be in a position to carry on with that programme rolling out support and encouragement to New Zealand parents and giving to the parents of today and the parents of tomorrow confidence that they will be supported in the difficult task they undertake. A number of parents feel that their ability to be effective parents is compromised by the student debt their children incur. United Future is looking forward to this Budget and to the achievement of one of our confidence and supply agreement objectives about a better deal for students through lowering the age at which the parental income test applies for student allowances. That will be a very positive step also that we will look forward to seeing come through as part of this Budget. 
I will raise one other issue as time runs out on me and that is the issue relating to our overall approach to climate change policy. There is general agreement around this House and around this country that we need to develop a clear and coherent response and it is generally accepted that an emissions trading regime is the best way of achieving that response. But the difficulty we have is that the headlong rush to put that into place may get in the way of resolving a lot of the individual complexities about the particular industry sectors be they forestry agriculture transport or the household sector. I made the point when the bill was introduced—and it has been borne out by subsequent events—that unless we get the buy-in of those sectors for the achievement of those policy goals the real fear is that we will end up in a situation where firstly the objectives cannot be obtained so there is uncertainty and secondly where the only certainty is that there is ongoing uncertainty and the need for further amendment. The consequence of both of those leaves us exposed unprotected and not in a position as a country to make forward progress. 
I am looking forward to this Budget giving some strategy and some direction in terms of how we will face these issues in a reasonable and coherent way and not simply to rush headlong to put in place a regime before this Parliament rises because it suits the Government of the day’s political advantage to do so. Climate change is not a partisan political issue; it affects every single one of us it is long term and it will outlast us as individuals and outlast Parliaments. It needs to be approached on that basis. A strategy on climate change will not work in this country if it is simply seen as the property of the Government of the day to introduce and pass as it sees fit and then to be amended by the next Government when it sees that what was put in place has not been working. So it will be important as this legislation goes through and as this Budget takes effect that that strategy is produced in a coherent and clear manner. With those thoughts I conclude; if the Budget reflects those New Zealand will continue down the path of reasonably steady growth that it has enjoyed over the last decade or so. But what is increasingly important now for people is that the quality of life they enjoy is recognised and becomes a greater part of the consideration of those issues.