Willis Nicola; Williams PotoNICOLA WILLIS (National): I rise to take a call on the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2018-19 Modernising Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill. Aren't I lucky because this is the first bill that I will speak on in 2019. I'd like to wish Madam Assistant Speaker and the members of this House a happy New Year in this a year that some have hopefully described as a year of delivery and which others of us are very aware is the year that the Government's chickens come home to roost because when you overpromise and under-deliver New Zealanders have a habit of noticing and voting accordingly.So when it comes to this bill we have had members opposite throughout the debate saying Oh well if you support so many measures within it why is it that you would oppose it?" Of course they're right. There's a lot of great work that the former Government did to create this bill: work around secondary tax simplifying the system work around KiwiSaver some of the bureaucratic things that are inherent in a tax system and that any Government should work to improve over time. But what this bill also does which members on this side of the House here the National Party members cannot abide is it entrenches in our tax system a set of tax rates that are higher than New Zealanders should be paying. They are so high that very soon a New Zealander on the average wage will be paying our highest tax rate. We in the National Party say that is not right that is not appropriate and it is not something that we are prepared to support.We put to you that if this Government had not repealed the personal income tax cuts that National had legislated for in Budget 2017 then the average New Zealander today would be a thousand dollars better off. Members opposite can say "Oh well you know that's just a technical issue to do with tax." Well a thousand dollars to the average New Zealander would make a great big difference right now particularly as we see living costs rising across the country and people struggling.Now James Shaw in his contribution to this debate decided to talk about the philosophy of tax and where National stands and I cannot leave those remarks un-responded to because what he said was that National opposes any form of taxation that somehow we don't believe in the collective provision of services such as education and health. That is verging on misleading and it is certainly wrong because it was the National-led Government that actually invested the highest ever record levels of expenditure in our education system and in our health system.What is true of the National Party is that we do believe that taxation must be taken to invest in collective services where the Government can best provide those services for the betterment of New Zealanders. But what we also believe and what we hold fast to is that any good Government should be sceptical of the power of Government to spend New Zealanders' money better than they can in their own families and for themselves.At the margin where we are making those decisions we should ask the question because otherwise you can get yourself into the kind of situation that Phil Twyford finds himself in where he's gone out there and he's said "Give me a few billion dollars and I'll sort out the housing crisis. I'm Phil Twyford—I can do it." And then he said "OK it's going to be brilliant because the Government's going to be running the show." and what is the reality? The reality today doesn't need to come from the way I describe it or the way Judith Collins describes it; we can rely on the neutral commentary of the Reserve Bank Governor who put it very clearly—who put it very clearly. He said that for every 100 houses that are built under KiwiBuild between 50 and 75 elsewhere won't be built.The reason I highlight this is because what it shows you is that when Government takes too much tax the result is that Government gets sloppy with New Zealanders' money—gets sloppy does not get the results that New Zealanders deserve does not have the impact on their lives that they expect and that is not acceptable. That is why 45 percent of New Zealanders said "We want a Government that's prepared to reduce tax rates." because we as New Zealanders in this country are inherently sceptical of Governments who say they can spend their way out of problems.So when we turn to this bill and we turn to this philosophical discussion that James Shaw put to us we can see that it is right—it is right for National to be opposing this bill and to be opposing the cementing of higher tax rates than New Zealanders need to be paying. You only need look at the detail of the clauses in this bill to understand how tax systems creep into New Zealanders' lives.Actually I'd like to commend Deborah Russell for the contribution she made in terms of showing us in quite detail in a way that really did make me feel like a young schoolgirl again being lectured by someone from quite on high. I wondered to myself: how do the people of New Lynn feel when they get these wonderful learned lectures? But what she did do in her contribution that I commend her on is that she detailed just how complex dealing with the tax system can be for New Zealanders' everyday lives and what she showed us is that New Zealanders don't like it when the taxman intrudes; when the taxman gets in the way of people's ability to invest in their business to grow their business; and when the taxman gets in the way of New Zealanders' ability to make decisions to grow things to invest in their own families.This is significant because the more we tax the more that happens. So National in saying that yes it's good to be improving the details as this bill does still absolutely stands on principle to say that where we can reduce tax rates we must. It is a disgrace that this bill further entrenches tax rates that we oppose.Hon Andrew Little: Here's the hard right talking.NICOLA WILLIS: When we—oh Andrew Little. The Hon Andrew Little says that it is hard right—it is hard right—for me to suggest that New Zealanders enjoy being able to earn their own money and make choices about how they spend it. They enjoy a Government that looks after their own money carefully that spends it wisely that watches those dollars and that ensures that they get results for the additional investments they make. He says that it is hard right to have a Government that actually delivers rather than just talks about how much they're spending. It is hard right to take issue with Shane Jones—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): I apologise to the member. This debate is interrupted and is set down for resumption next sitting day.Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 6 p.m."