Copeland Gordon: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — First Reading Instruction to Finance and Expenditure Committee 
Copeland Gordon: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — First Reading Instruction to Finance and Expenditure Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:216] 
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
: 
 Pursuant to the confidence and supply agreement with the Labour Party United Future will be voting in favour of this bill. Notwithstanding that reality when it comes to the issue of the removal of student loan interest post-graduation for those who remain in New Zealand our own policy position differs greatly from that of the Labour Party. We believe that a policy that would write off 10 percent of the principal of a student’s loan for each year he or she remains in New Zealand post-graduation would better incentivise debt repayment and avoid the obvious moral hazard of Labour’s policy. However we live in a democracy and as the saying goes the people have spoken. By a narrow margin we have a Labour-led Government through the last election. 
Our approach to the provision of an adequate income for families with children also differs from the extension of the Working for Families package as it is proposed in this bill. Having said that however I say an adequate income for such families is also a high policy priority for United Future. I think that any civilised country particularly one such as New Zealand with a history of social justice needs to give— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the member but the time has come for the dinner break. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. 
GORDON COPELAND 
: When we adjourned for the dinner break I was commenting on the Working for Families package and saying that an adequate income for families with children is also a high priority policy for United Future. I think that any civilised country particularly one with a history of social justice such as New Zealand needs to give policy priority to income adequacy for families raising children. United Future certainly wants to ensure not only that child poverty is reduced significantly but also that all Kiwi parents have the financial means to give their children the best possible start in life. Therefore we reject the notion that the Working for Families package is some kind of handout. That is not its motivation. Rather in our view it is an investment in the future of our nation and an advancement of the common good of our society—a tangible and practical recognition that intergenerational families are the irreplaceable foundation on which the social and economic future of New Zealand will be built. A moment’s consideration will I have no doubt reveal the self-evident truth of that proposition. 
United Future is delighted however that our confidence and supply agreement with the Labour-led Government foreshadows a Government discussion document covering income splitting for couples with dependent children. Income splitting for taxation purposes has been and remains a key part of our policy and one that is designed not as a replacement for but as a supplement to the Working for Families package. Income splitting will reduce the tax burden for an estimated 325000 couples and in many instances especially for single-income families by substantial amounts. Income splitting is a tangible recognition of the fundamental contribution that couples with children make to our society and our economy and it would increase the after-tax income of those families right up through the income tax brackets to a combined income of up to $120000 per annum for a household led by a couple with dependent children. 
John Key mentioned in his speech the high effective marginal tax rates that flow from the Working for Families package. But John Key knows—because I have shared the figures with him—that that problem is also addressed through an income-splitting system. Because it actually reduces the tax burden in the first instance for many families in the way I have explained it deals with the problem that he has identified. So from that point of view too it is an integral and important addition to the current taxation system in New Zealand. 
Why is income splitting a priority for United Future? Simply stated it is because it is fair and just. A considerable self-sacrifice is demanded of those who choose to continue the intergenerational structure of human society by becoming parents. The arrival of one or more new babies is but the first step in the 18-year or so task of raising educating and training the next generation of our society. All the studies show—and there are significant international longitudinal studies that have evidenced this fact—that on average the best outcome for children in terms of health education income level and the avoidance of involvement in the criminal justice system arises when two parents combine their complementary gifts and talents to perform the task of raising children. That is especially so when those parents are aided by contributions from grandparents and other whanau members and are surrounded by supportive local communities. It surely must be objectively recognised that such couples are in a different position including financially than either single people or those in adult relationships—which include many grandparents such as my wife and me who are now without dependent children. Income splitting is a fair and just way of recognising those different financial circumstances. 
At the same time income splitting both recognises and assists the promotion of that mum dad and the kids ideal based on the best interests of the children themselves. As I mentioned earlier all the international studies indicate that the best results for children flow from families that are headed by a mum and a dad who are committed jointly to the raising of their children. We know that virtually all of the negative statistics in our society—be they for health education low income poverty or involvement in the criminal justice system and crime—flow predominantly from families where that is not the case and where there is very often one parent who is struggling. I salute those parents as I did in my maiden speech because they are doing a very difficult job but they themselves tell me United Future should keep pushing its policies because their position is not ideal. They say that poverty is not great that is it not a great way to live and that they only wish their circumstances had turned out differently. 
We need to continue as a Parliament and as a society to emphasise the reality that families headed by a mum and a dad are the best way to bring up children. That is the best way and it has stood the test of time. It is an irreplaceable part of any strategy whose objective is to build a strong and prosperous future for our lovely nation of New Zealand.