Foss Craig: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Foss Craig: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:764] 
CRAIG FOSS (National—Tukituki) 
: 
 Thank you Mr Chairman for earlier guidance—I note that the wine equalisation tax provisions that I mentioned are in Part 2 as opposed to Part 1. 
First of all as a member of the Finance and Expenditure Committee I thank the committee for its work and note the almost unanimous support its members gave to the wine equalisation tax provisions. They put New Zealand growers into pretty much the same position as Australian growers—essentially they bring Australian tax law into New Zealand. I raise a caution there. I wonder whether in fact that is the thin edge of a wedge because the Australianisation of all things New Zealand—regulation law and statute—is something that I think Parliament needs to address in the coming years. 
One of the great things about the bill is that it transfers all risk foreign exchange cash flow and interest rates etc. to the Australian distributor or importer of New Zealand wine. Being the MP for one of New Zealand’s greatest wine-producing regions I am very happy to support that area and I am sure that the various ratepayers of Napier have done a good job. I also note that the change has come about after pressure from our wine industry. Politicians from the National Party forced a change. Well done I say. Sadly I note that New Zealand apples are still not allowed into Australia even though we have made just as much noise on that issue. 
I move to the Working for Families package. During the election campaign somebody said that the package was a form of tax relief. Well goodness gracious who does that tax relief come from? It comes from those who have imposed too much tax in the first instance. As I keep saying the Government should not take any more than it needs. Essentially the Working for Families package is a way of controlling the net wage of New Zealanders regardless of what their gross income is. There is no clearer evidence of that than the effect of some of the rebates which have a marginal tax rate of 102 percent. When a person earns $1 Dr Cullen receives $1.02. Why would one bother? Why would a person get out of bed to try to get ahead? I would like someone to tell me how that will affect aspirations to break out of the welfare cycle and dependency of so many families—particularly Maori families whose income in the Hawke’s Bay is $3000 per annum less than non-Maori households. How will a marginal tax rate of 102 percent help those families to break out? 
So many members get up in this Chamber and rave on about breaking the dependency cycle etc. etc. We should be brave be staunch and take a stand. Pita Sharples also noted that point the other day but he still reluctantly gave his party’s support to this bill. That is not good enough. It is a trade-off that sacrifices the future the incentives and the aspirations of so many New Zealanders for the sake of small-time political gain. That is why so many politicians have such a bad name. Who else supports this bill? I note that Mr Woolerton— 
Hon Member 
: As part of the Labour Party. 
CRAIG FOSS 
:—as part of the Government said in response to my good colleague Lockwood Smith’s speech that this has always been the case. Well yes. Is that a reason not to challenge it? Is that a reason not to address it? If you have always worn the same Y-fronts then get into some briefs. You must challenge the status quo. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: You must not bring the Chairperson into the debate. 
CRAIG FOSS 
: I apologise. I move back to Working for Families. An earlier speaker in relation to the Working for Families provisions supported this bill because that member said it would help people at the lower end. Why not then give those people a million bucks? This bill will not help the people at the lower end of the spectrum. It will help their net income in the short term but it will cap their future and lock them into exactly where they are right now. It sends a message to them not to bother to get out of bed—not to even try to break out of the cycle. I do not understand how so many members of this Parliament can give rhetoric about breaking out of the dependency cycle etc. and can go forth and vote for this bill. I really do not understand how they can look themselves in the eye.