Heatley Phil: Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Heatley Phil: Taxation (Annual Rates Maori Organisations Taxpayer Compliance and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:606;Page:4096] 
PHIL HEATLEY (NZ National—Whangarei) 
: 
 I can only continue Tony Ryall’s sound arguments put to this House regarding the commencement dates and the particular issue he raises that not only is there a more favourable treatment for Maori in terms of the tax rates—whereby we have 19.5 percent for Tony Ryall’s neighbours’ children if they are Maori— 
Darren Hughes 
: What clause is it? 
PHIL HEATLEY 
: Clause 68. In fact if Labour members had read the bill they would find that clause 68 changes the tax rate so that not only will Maori children receive a more favourable tax rate than Tony Ryall’s children who live just next door but that that favourable tax rate will come into force on a commencement date earlier than for Tony Ryall’s children. In other words it is not just more favourable treatment it is more timely treatment. I focus on that because we are talking about the commencement dates. 
I was interested to see that those provisions—we are talking about clause 2 but clause 68 talks about that tax rate—come into force on the day that this bill receives the royal assent. Whereas other conditions such as clause 45—a considerable number of Labour members have not read the bill but if they turn to clause 45 they will see a graph in the bill that Ministers have approved. Did members notice that there is a graph in the bill that Ministers have approved—as opposed to graphs that Ministers do not approve—that explains the payroll and employee information from employer to the pay intermediary to the employee. Of course the Inland Revenue Department is kept in the loop. 
Legislation addressing issues like that will not come into effect until 15 January 2004. Yet that is an essential part of the bill of the running of this country and particularly of businesses. Why will those provisions not come into effect when this legislation receives royal assent? That is the question that I put forward. Tony Ryall has put that question forward as will other members on this side. 
I notice a whole lot of new provisions in the Supplementary Order Paper. The commencement dates of those provisions are put back much further than the provision of the favourable treatment in terms of tax for Maori. That has been expanded from the original bill; where there were 9 clauses to come into force on 1 April 2003 there are now 16 clauses that were to come into force at the same time that Maori receive more favourable treatment under New Zealand’s tax law that have been put back. 
I just put it to the House that members can argue all they like that Maori should receive more favourable tax treatment but will they also argue that they should have more timely legislation that they should receive that treatment in a more timely manner? The level playing field is fast disintegrating and that is indicated in this bill. Clauses 133 to 136 137—part 2 of that—138 and 142: 1 July 2003. They are put back even more—another few months apart from that which addresses the more favourable tax treatment of Maori. If members investigate those parts of the bill clause 133 for example which for members who have not read it addresses interpretation—that concerns me.