Shearer David: Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Shearer David: Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 20 May 2010. Volume:663;Page:11177. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DAVID SHEARER (Labour—Mt Albert) 
: 
 I concur with my colleague Stuart Nash in terms of renaming this bill the “Broken Promises Bill”. The Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill is a little bit like one of those sugary drinks: it looks good and it tastes good but when we have had it we think it is not so good for us after all. This bill really is not so good for us after all. As David Cunliffe just said if we subtract from the tax that we are supposedly getting back in this Budget the 6 percent inflation the accident compensation levies the car registration increases the Auckland tax increases that will be imposed upon us in terms of rates because we are making such a mess of the Auckland super-city the tobacco tax and the power prices—and of course because the inflation rate has gone up interest rates will go up—what do we have? We have a rather uncomfortable feeling that maybe we have just been had. It will take a couple of days to work through but as my colleague Clayton Cosgrove said before we know what it is like. The Government puts its Budget down it gets plaudits saying that it is a good Budget and after 2 3 or 4 days the real oil comes out and suddenly we realise that actually it is not so good after all. 
I will touch on another aspect of this Budget and what this Budget really does not address at all. The Budget mentions agriculture only once or twice. It does not look at the productivity of this country. Productivity is based on for example our savings rates. If we look across the Tasman to Australia we see that Australia’s employers’ contribution has just gone from 8 percent— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: We are debating clauses 1 and 2. 
DAVID SHEARER 
: I beg your pardon Mr Chairman. The title of this bill should be the “Broken Promises Bill”. 
I will tell members about one other broken promise. In 2008 the National Party said it would double the amount spent on research and development. What do we have today? We have half the rate of research and development that National promised in 2008. Not only that it took away the 15 percent tax credit that the Labour Government had already put in place. So that is why I believe this bill should be called the “Broken Promises Bill”. 
This Government has broken its promises about what it has already said. Not only has the Government broken its promise not to increase GST but also it has broken its promise to increase spending on research and development. The research and development spend that the Government came out with was $56 million a year which will be paid in the form of grants and vouchers. That means that small and medium sized businesses have to go on their knees to Government bureaucrats to ask for money in order to be recompensed for their research and development. That is what they have to do. If the Government had stayed with the tax credits that Labour put in place it would have been able to double the amount of business research and development spend in this country. It could have been upped from $1 billion to $2 billion. 
This bill is aptly named the “Broken Promises Bill” as my colleague Mr Nash has said. It breaks the promises on innovation. The Government therefore breaks its promise on productivity and it breaks its promise on GST. As I said the “Broken Promises Bill” is an apt name for this bill. 
The question was put that clause 1 be agreed to. 
A party vote was called for on the question that clause 1 be agreed to.