Williamson Maurice: Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee 
Williamson Maurice: Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16502] 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National—Pakuranga) 
: 
 I am delighted to take a call on the Taxation (Annual Rates Venture Capital and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. I want to concentrate my speech on the issue of taxation with regard to the funding for roading. 
I suggest to members of the Committee who have not been here for too long—and I notice a number of members from the Green Party and United Future who were not around in the mid-1990s—that they take a look at  
Hansard 
 and check what happened. Winston Peters was then a bit of a lone voice. I think he and Tau Henare were the only two members in the House from New Zealand First before the coalition—this was in 1995. Winston Peters put up a member’s bill proposing that because there was plenty of taxation already all the money that went to the consolidated account from petrol tax—and at that stage it was about 24c or 25c per litre—really should go to roading. That is what Winston Peters proposed in this House. He said that all of the 24c should be moved from the consolidated account and go to roading. 
I want members to refresh their memory. They should have a look at  
Hansard 
 if they want to see what happened. The Labour Party headed by Helen Clark and deputy leader Michael Cullen voted for that. They said in the House that it was wrong to be bleeding that money off road users when there was a desperate need for money for roading. Michael Cullen—it is in  
Hansard 
 members should go and check it—voted for the entire 24c to go across. 
John Key 
: That’s surprising. 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: I know it is surprising. That has stopped a lot of people in their tracks. 
John Key 
: I’m shocked. 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: That is true. They voted for Winston Peters’ bill. Fortunately the bill was defeated by only a couple of votes but Helen Clark Michael Cullen and all the other Labour members voted that the whole 24c be moved across. Lianne Dalziel who is in the Chamber tonight voted for that measure and it will be in  
Hansard 
 that Damien O’Connor voted for it. Now what do we face? We face a Government that next April will stick another 5c per litre tax— 
John Key 
: What? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: That is right it will stick another 5c per litre tax on petrol for ordinary motorists. That is at a time when petrol prices have gone through the ceiling because of geopolitical matters the Iraq war and a whole range of other issues. 
I say to the Minister in the chair Michael Cullen that if the Government needs the 5c for extra roading—he says it does and I accept that roading desperately needs to be better funded—why on earth could he not take it from the huge surplus of $7.4 billion or whatever the number is that he is already running? The surplus actually grows by the day; every time I look at Treasury’s website it has changed. If Dr Cullen thinks that taking 5c from that is wrong how come he voted in the House to take all 24c and move it to the road fund? 
John Key 
: He was in the Opposition. 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: My colleague John Key has given me the answer. He was in Opposition then so it was good to vote for moving the whole sham shooting-box over but now he does not want even 5c transferred from a surplus unseen unparalleled and unheard of in this country’s history. 
If members think the money is not needed for roading then let me correct another error made by the Minister of Transport Pete Hodgson in this House only a few weeks ago. He said that Peter Brown—I think that is who he was having a smack at—was not right about the amount of money spent on roads as a percentage of GDP and that it had increased under this Government. That is what he said. So I put some written questions. Again I ask members to check questions for written answer. I asked how much money was spent on roads and what percentage of the GDP that was in each of the years 1998 1999 2000 and so on. Lo and behold it is interesting that in the 1998-1999 year which was the last full year of a National Government the money was the highest it had ever been. Every year since then Labour’s spending on roads has been less as a percentage of GDP than what National spent in its last year. That is not what Pete Hodgson said. 
So I understand why Michael Cullen wants to spend some more on roads. He is embarrassed about how little spending has gone on. Why smack the motorist around with 5c more at the pump when the cost of petrol is already beyond our wildest expectations compared with where we were only a year ago? Do members remember a year ago when the price of super was under $1 and 91 octane was under 90c? 
Hon Damien O'Connor 
: It was not. 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: Damien O’Connor says it was not. On the West Coast they probably pay $3.50 for super but I tell him that that is not what people pay in Auckland. He should get real and get to understand what Auckland prices are compared with what people pay on the West Coast. Now the Minister of Finance says that he needs that money so he is going to stick an extra 5c on the backs of the working class. Where are the Greens with regard to the working class on this? The Minister says he needs that tax when he has a $7.4 billion surplus. Bill Birch would have gone to heaven on the idea of a $7.4 billion surplus. Bill Birch’s total surpluses cumulated did not come to what this Minister is running in one year. The Minister has come to this Chamber and cannot keep a straight face because he wants more.