Nash Stuart: Taxation (Annual Rates Trans-Tasman Savings Portability KiwiSaver and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Nash Stuart: Taxation (Annual Rates Trans-Tasman Savings Portability KiwiSaver and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:666;Page:13470] 
STUART NASH (Labour) 
: 
 As I was saying before Labour supports the Taxation (Annual Rates Trans-Tasman Savings Portability Kiwi-Saver and Remedial Matters) Bill. The reason we support it is that it is a remedial matters bill and it also introduces changes to tax rules to allow New Zealanders to return home. Labour always supports sensible legislation that makes it easier for ordinary Kiwis—or extraordinary Kiwis—to do business and work. 
I will talk about just a couple of bits in this bill. The bill brings in trans-Tasman portability of retirement savings. Sam Lotu-Iiga hit the nail on the head when he said that this bill will help Kiwis coming home from Australia. Why is that? It is because they have significantly greater savings than do New Zealanders in New Zealand. New Zealanders in Australia have significantly greater savings because Australia has had a superannuation scheme going for a long time. New Zealand also had a superannuation scheme. It was set up by Roger Douglas but it was cut by a National Government. My colleague David Cunliffe has alluded to it. Can we imagine the size of our capital markets now if that superannuation scheme had been allowed to continue like the Australian scheme? I think the estimation of worth is about $300 billion. The reason we have such a savings deficit at the moment is that a National Government cut the superannuation scheme—National cut it. 
Sam Lotu-Iiga stands up and talks about the necessity of a GST increase. I challenge that member to hold a public meeting in Maungakiekie with the title “Why GST is important”. I challenge him to do that; I know that my colleague Carol Beaumont would come along. Sam would be ripped limb from limb. There is no reason why that increase in GST is important especially when the money has been set aside for tax cuts for the wealthy. It is just not fair. 
I will talk about Peter Dunne’s Supplementary Order Paper. It shows what an absolute shambles this whole GST implementation has been. Mr Dunne talked about Labour’s introduction of GST in 1989 well over 20 years ago and I hoped he might have learnt from that experience and come to the House with a bill that did not need 28 pages of Supplementary Order Paper. In fact Ernst and Young one of the largest accountancy companies is throwing up its hands in frustration and saying that it is a little more difficult than New Zealanders would have thought—“this is not a moderate increase”. Those words were from Ernst and Young not the Labour Party. We agree with that major accountancy company which is highlighting the fact that this is an absolute shambles. 
I have heard stories that Inland Revenue Department staff are being inundated with calls on questions to do with GST that they simply do not have answers to. People are tearing their hair out because the Inland Revenue Department staff themselves simply do not know the answers. Mr Dunne set up a GST commission and that was a mighty fine idea. It has reported back with 23 pages of Supplementary Order Paper but obviously it has not been communicated to the Inland Revenue Department staff on the ground. 
The reason we support Mr Dunne’s Supplementary Order Paper is that its changes have to be made. There is no way we can put through such a flawed bill that leaves so many holes and that leaves taxpayers not knowing whether they are Arthur or Martha. That is what we are supporting—the integrity of the tax system. We are not supporting an increase in GST. We have never supported an increase in GST. We went to the people of New Zealand from Kaitaia to Bluff and none of them supported an increase in GST at all. This is an absolute shambles. 
Let us talk about the savings history time line. In 1974 Labour and the Kirk Government introduced a compulsory superannuation scheme. As mentioned Roger Douglas was the architect. As an aside I think it is quite sad to note that the last speech I heard Roger Douglas give was in support of a rort on workers’ rights. He is a man whose father and grandfather were Labour Party MPs. Labour Party philosophy is in his blood but at some point he turned to the dark side and now he is giving speeches in the House against the rights of workers.