Hobbs Marian: Budget Debate 
Hobbs Marian: Budget Debate 
[Volume:626;Page:20848] 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 I am very proud to be a member of this New Zealand Government and I want to put on the record that I do not want to be an Australian. The Australian Budget did deliver $6 a week to the average worker but it also delivered to the average worker the news that their health system had had its funding limited in order to finance that $6 a week—and Australians for that still face higher tax rates. They pay 30c in the dollar on income above NZ$23000 and from 1 July 42c in the dollar on income above A$63000. That compares with our 33c rate which kicks in at $38000. 
So I am proud to be a member of this team and proud to be part of a team that trusts the people. There is no need for sudden surprises or for “black” Budgets and that sort of hyped-up stuff. There is no need for photographs of a Budget. This is a steady-as-you-go trustful group of people. I am proud to be prudent but most of all I am proud to be associated with a Minister of Finance and a Budget that maintain a strong and credible stance. 
By contrast let us go back to 1999. State assets like TVNZ were being stripped down ready for sale. In 1999 legislation had been passed that allowed both a tax cut and a cut in superannuation and the date set was 2000. So when people hear “tax cuts” they should be very very careful. “Tax cut” may mean “superannuation cut”—or anything else. 
Dr Richard Worth 
: Oh! 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: Well that is what has happened before in 2000. In 2005 National is out there promising tax cuts again—just like it has done before. It is really good to look at the cartoons of 1999 and see that National is saying the same old things. 
But what would those tax cuts cost? If one brought the corporate rate down to 30c and brought those on 39c and 33c in the dollar down to 30c that would cost $1.725 billion a year. One would not do it for a year; one might do it for at least 10 years—and that would be $17 billion. OK to do that would mean that one would have no spending at all. But that is not what National Party members have said. We are struggling to get consistent policy out of them—in fact we are struggling to get policy out of them at all—but they have been saying things like: “Well we will give $4.5 billion over the next 10 years in transport $540 million for the Waikato expressway $120 million for Northland roads $110 million for a toll-free harbour link in Tauranga.” and they want us to be like the Australians and have a strike air force. They want us to have law and order which would require at least seven prisons—most of those of course would be privatised—and they have said that they have locked into the Superannuation Fund but have they? I can remember some broken promises around that area before. 
So when are the tax cuts coming? And here comes the other problem because we have not had any consistency from John Key versus Dr “Baloney Pony” Brash. Dr Brash said that National would have a Budget before Christmas and there would be a prospect of good tax relief for all mainstream New Zealanders. John Key said: “It would be my hope that the mini-Budget would give a Christmas bonus to all working New Zealanders.” Then they changed their minds. John Key conceded that tax cuts would have to be rolled out over the longer term to avoid inflation which probably means between 6 and 9 years. That is a very long time until Christmas. So are these tax cuts real and are they coming? We do not think so. 
Therefore it must be about borrowing again. I wonder whether anyone remembers little Olivia and the debts that she had to pay. She had to pay debts because we had Governments that borrowed and that went out there and said: “We will borrow! We will borrow for this we will borrow for that we will borrow for your tax cuts and that’s OK because we can do this!”. That is what they went on about. But Olivia had to see half her taxes go on interest payments for the borrowing that was done by those Governments. In contrast we have had a Minister of Finance who has reduced our debt and who has freed up taxes not to be spent on interest but to be spent on health education and special education in particular. 
Dr Richard Worth 
: Wasted! 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: You say that special education is a waste of money? 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order! 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: I must have that conversation with Mr Key again Mr Assistant Speaker because I am sure that you did not say that special education was a waste of money. But if one cannot have tax cuts and one promised expenditure then one must borrow and I never saw Don Brash “Baloney Pony” as Muldoon the big spender who would let inflation go. Of course we could go back to borrow and hope—that is what it was in those days—but it does not make sense because Dr Brash was the man in charge of the Reserve Bank. He promised a tax cut. Taxes would pay for interest; they would not pay for health and education. We would get a tax cut have fewer services and pay more in interest on our credit cards and our mortgages. It gets worse because a theme is emerging: tax cuts borrow for roads borrow for private prisons—not State prisons; private prisons—cuts to the public service. 
There I come to the wondrous quote I got from Dr Cullen today. Dr Cullen said: “Every billion cut to revenue would require a 2.1 percent cut to expenditure on 2006 numbers.” That is 497 fewer primary school teachers 394 fewer secondary school teachers—wiping out all the workload gains and other concessions that we had gained for primary and secondary schools. There would be 154 fewer sworn police staff. Well I wonder how the National candidate in Wellington Central will deal with that? 
Today Dr Nick Smith accused the Government of wasting money on bureaucracy. I ask which bureaucracy and which public servants? I challenged the National candidate for Wellington Central to specify who will lose their jobs and that candidate said: “The majority of public servants are doing a good job.” The problem is that he did not specify what the majority is. Is it a 51 percent majority? Are we going to have a 49 percent cut in the public service? Which public servants will it be? Judith Collins when she was going on about health before talked about Treaty of Waitangi cover and about the things that were really important for people whom I regard as being really special such as Irihapeti Ramsden. She talked about making a Maori elder comfortable in a hospital by not having to share his or her pillowcases with other people who had been in the hospital before. That is very important in the health of that person—I do not regard it as being stupid or a waste of money. But even if we cut that out that would not produce $1.75 billion. Will National reduce the health wages that have been put in there? Will those members go back to the rundown on radiotherapists? What will be closed down? Will they close down and review what happened in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade? How many embassies will be closed? Will those members lock out the consular section? 
We come back to the environment. When I inherited the Ministry for the Environment it was a very small core ministry but it spent tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars on consultants and that is what we have saved money on. We have cut the consultants and put in public servants who are connected to local government Fonterra and the people in the Packaging Accord 2004 and who are out there solving problems and working with industry. This Government has formed those partnerships. Before when it was contractors writing policy yes that was very doubtful. That is the kind of change that maybe those members want to go back to—short-term and expensive. 
Would a National Government cut aid? Would it go back on what the people of New Zealand did when they dipped into their pockets for the tsunami aid? Would it cut that? Is that expenditure safe? I am scared for our commitment to overseas aid. I am scared for our commitment to clean water. One cannot give tax cuts and pay for roads privatised prisons and a strike air force; maintain our international commitments such as NZAID and our peace contributions; continue our environmental clean-ups like Mapua and the Tui mine; and continue our commitment to clean rivers. 
If I listened to the Opposition I might be afraid but then I remember the New Zealand voters. I trust their common sense and their fairness. They want credible commitments in the Budget they want fairness they want money for things like special education and they want social justice. They want a New Zealand to be proud of and so do I.