Goldsmith PaulHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): Thank you Madam Speaker. I stand on behalf of the National Party to support this bill to the select committee stage. It's been the National Party's policy outlined in our discussion document to agree with the idea of a longer period of people being in New Zealand before they are eligible for New Zealand super for the points made by Mark Patterson the member introducing this bill. It is a very generous superannuation system that we have and we want it to be sustainable long term. It's only right and proper that people should have the opportunity to contribute to New Zealand society and New Zealand taxes for an extended period before they get such a valuable superannuation. Ten years has been short and we have proposed extending it to 20 years. So we're broadly in support of it.It would be fair to say that this is a very lazy piece of legislative work by our friend from New Zealand First—running to one page and very little in the detail. I think that there is a fair argument to be had at the select committee as to how exactly this is introduced. It would be I think quite harsh for somebody who had been in the country for nine years and nine months and had been in expectation of superannuation on their 10th year to suddenly discover that they have to wait another 10 years. So there is an argument for some sort of phasing in of this proposal. I think we'd like to discuss that and get a sense of what the options are and what the implications are for that and so I'd be interested to have that as an ongoing discussion in the select committee.I was intrigued to hear the member from New Zealand First talking about the long-term sustainability of New Zealand superannuation. Of course all the parties on the other side of the House are determined to keep the age at 65 for the next 100 years it seems or however long; only National has talked about in 17 or 18 years increasing the age limit for New Zealand superannuation up to the age of 67 which is something that Diane Maxwell the former Retirement Commissioner recommended. The member was happy to refer to her recommendation in this area but not in that. It's always interesting that we had very many long and lengthy articles from a renowned media economist like Shamubeel Eaqub about how John Key used to have his head in the sand over the age limit for New Zealand superannuation and now the National Party has taken a longer-term view the Prime Minister has her head in the sand but we never see those articles any more. So I'd encourage him to start writing them again and recognise the fact that New Zealand superannuation is a wonderful asset it is available to all New Zealanders and it is affordable in the long term but it does make sense that if we all live longer healthier lives then perhaps we should be able to recognise that in the distant future.In terms of the importance of getting on top of debt I agree wholeheartedly with the member when he says that New Zealand is taking on an enormous amount of debt. Budget 2020 did indicate that on current patterns New Zealand's net debt would go from about $60 billion to $200 billion in the next four years. Many people would say that Treasury estimates of revenue are pretty optimistic and so it could be worse than that. That is a very a huge mountain of debt for New Zealanders to repay. On that score I think that we need a Government policy that is a little bit more than just debt-fuelled Government spending on a colossal scale and waiting for a vaccine. So we'll be having a discussion as we get closer to the election about something a bit more robust than that. Over here—DEPUTY SPEAKER: It would be good if we could have some discussion sort of focused on the bill.Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: —on this side of the House we will—we will Madam Speaker. I would make the point that the member introducing this bill did point to the debt situation that the country faces as being one of the reasons why this bill was required and I was just agreeing with him and also noting that when you're facing large amounts of debt you do need to have policies that are designed to get on top of that debt. One of those—Hon Stuart Nash: What would you do—increase taxes?Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: —policies is relying on private sector investment to grow and not increasing taxes everywhere like is proposed on that side of the House. I heard that member on tape and he should be ashamed of himself and I'm glad that he's apologised to his New Zealand First—DEPUTY SPEAKER: None of which has anything to do with the bill.Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: No but it was a response to an interjection from the other side of the House Madam Speaker.DEPUTY SPEAKER: It may well have been.Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: If we are to be taunted and have such a difficult time we should be able to respond.DEPUTY SPEAKER: You're not going to repeat it for the third time though are you?Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: So finally in conclusion I would like to say that the National Party does support this bill to the select committee. We are concerned about the abruptness of the introduction of the extra 10 years and we think that there is a discussion to be had about how it is introduced and that is a discussion that we look forward to having at the select committee. Thank you Madam Speaker.