Smith DamienDAMIEN SMITH (ACT): I wonder do the Green Party as partners with the Labour Party—did they know about this initiative? And if not so I can understand the disappointment in the member's communications.This Government has lost its nerve tonight. Grant Robertson treats our income as if it's just there to be chopped up into taxes and I see the Minister's left the room. He believes that every—Hon Carmel Sepuloni: You're not allowed to say that!DAMIEN SMITH: He believes your money is—Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Point of order Mr Speaker. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ian McKelvie): Order! Order! The member shouldn't refer to people who have left the room.DAMIEN SMITH: Thank you. This Government believes that your money is a Government resource even before it's taxed. And once again with this Budget we've now found out the price to gain political support and it's $350. That's $27 a week which probably gets you a slab of Speight's. I'd like to price check that but I haven't had the opportunity yet to do that. In terms of the Taxation (Cost of Living Payments) Bill there's been no regulatory impact assessment; no advice from Treasury on this. So when was this constructed? Was it just dreamt up because Hey we've got a problem with the cost of living under the pressure from the ACT and the National parties."? And was it slipped in before the Budget was printed a couple of days ago? Because this can't seriously be a strategy that will help people with the cost of living. It's temporary it's got to be wound down quickly—just like the fuel taxes—and it doesn't actually lead to success. That's why the ACT Party argues for major tax cuts—and the public deserve them this time—where we have a simple three flat-rate structure of 17.5 percent for people under $70000 and 28 percent for those above. That would have stimulated the economy it would have helped with the cost of living it would have actually made sense in the mind of the public and it would have been something the IRD would have backed and administered easily. But no we've come up with Mr Parker's initiative that—after his great speech to the nation on taxation and helping people this is what the Labour Party has come up with. Now in terms of the Commissioner of Inland Revenue using their powers to do this and to sign it off we've got a situation where under urgency again we've missed the story. It's as if Labour has missed the story of the golden goose or maybe it hasn't. A key part of the "brain drain Budget" is to not tax too many productive people. Households are facing the greatest cost of living crisis ever. Even though the Prime Minister and Mr Robertson were sharing cheese rolls today people this weekend will be going "Can I pick up that kilo of cheese which is more expensive or do I do without?" It's only four years ago that—under this Budget the amount of tax per person has gone from $15825 up to $21945. So it's not even giving and taking away; this is just taking away. This is potentially the greatest piece of political spin this Government has ever done. It's not transparent; it's just been a hit and it hasn't been thought through in a fashion that actually will get traction in the household this weekend. It's going to fuel inflation it's going to drive up—with the Monetary Policy Statement next week—the rates of mortgages and rentals. Everything this Government does is like pouring fuel on the fire. The public would rather have tax cuts like ACT is proposing and not to leave for Australia. We're now the highest taxed country in the Asia-Pacific region; our Aussie friends have pulled ahead our Singaporean friends have pulled ahead and our South Korean friends have pulled ahead because they're more productive. And so we want real change; not something that's thrown out which lasts for a year. There's three monthly payments—it's like going down to Noel Leeming right? This is not how Government tax should be administered and it is money out the door to try and cover up that this Government has a cost of living crisis—it admitted it today and we know that this is not going to fix it.So if you look at a nurse under ACT's alternative budget they'd be $2000 better off if they had a better tax rate. A family on an average full-time salary of $73000 a part-time worker earning $30000 and two children could be $2800 better off. A nurse and a teacher or police officer near the beginning of the year earning $60000 would be nearly $800 better off. So why is this Government just not giving back to the people? Why is it so intransient considering the other programmes that it's given out billions and billions of dollars to? The first people that should have got this money are the citizens of New Zealand. So everyone's getting squeezed—nothing's changed today except a few extra dollars chucked out which will buy a few loaves of bread. The Kiwi battler is going to make a decision about this Government on how it earns its money how it pays its bills. It wants the Government to get out of its life and it wants transparency in the day-to-day management of its household income. This was the day for Grant Robertson to tighten his belt but no he loosened it. He's fuelled inflation he's off to the races again with a five-year plan that doesn't make sense in a holistic way and Mr Shaw says we need two more Budgets of enlightenment. Well where does that leave the country at a net debt level? So we've got to start earning away in a productive economy and we've got to accept that things are tight. But you know in the New Zealand household people are tightening up their budgets they are saving $27. They are actually doing it right? They've been doing it for a long time now before this Government has stepped in today. So Grant Robertson needs to stop treating our revenues like he's going to tax them and fill the gaps in his Budgets. And he needs to stop telling the people—and insulting the people—of New Zealand that this is what you're going to get to get through this crisis. This is the greatest crisis of living we've seen in a long time in this country. And Mr Parker needs to adopt his attitude about Government resources and taxes where he's taken in so much money that it's time to contemplate a cross-party alliance to reduce taxes and give Kiwis a break.So in terms of this piece of law tonight and the explanatory notes—they've very very interesting—under the scheme a cost of living payment has been indexed to $70000 per annum. I asked Treasury today in anticipation of this moment "Could you define to me what a low and middle income earner was?" And they said "We don't know. We haven't got a definition in the Budget packs." I said "Well how are we supposed to do the calculations?" So Treasury has not defined what a low and middle income earner is and that just about sums it up. So there needs to be changes there as well. So thank you for the opportunity Mr Speaker to speak on this bill. We will look at the numbers very carefully but we won't be supporting it."