Wilkinson Kate: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
Wilkinson Kate: Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:628;Page:783] 
KATE WILKINSON (National) 
: 
 I take issue with even the title of this bill. It is very unwisely called the Taxation (Annual Rates and Urgent Measures) Bill. That is deceptive; it should actually be called the “Taxation (Hide the Bad Parts Amongst the Good Parts) Bill”. Like most wine that part of the content is certainly palatable. As a parochial Cantabrian I give my support to it on behalf of the winegrowers in our province who include the makers of superb pinot noir such as Muddy Water which is the literal translation of Waipara—although some may have thought it referred to the Minister for Social Development and Employment. In our area we have the makers of wonderful cool-climate riesling and chardonnay among others. So I support my colleagues in their support of their Hawke’s Bay and Marlborough wines. 
But unlike the Labour Government we also support the Gisborne growers—not just the winegrowers but the squash growers and the tomato growers. Those poor Gisborne growers have endured two civil defence events and they have been promised absolutely nothing in relief aid. That is like the rest of the bill. It is discriminatory it is poorly targeted and it is very very bad decision-making. 
This bill discriminates against so many working families for whom Working for Families just does not work. Under this Government a person is not even in a family if he or she has only one child. Under this Government a person is not in a family at all if he or she has no children or sadly cannot have children. How discriminatory is that? A parallel can be drawn with the student loan package which also discriminates. It discriminates against those such as plumbers who borrow to buy their tools of trade. They take the risk they borrow the money and they pay the interest. Why should students who are also purchasing their tools of trade—their education—not pay interest when the plumbers do? That is unfair it is bad decision-making and it discriminates. The student loan policy discriminates against those who have scrimped and saved and got rid of their student debt. 
I am appalled with the student loan policy the unashamedly—and admittedly bold—vote-buying and bribery the knee-jerk panic reaction. Where are the costings? Where is the fiscal responsibility the calculations or the budget? What is worse is that we have a lack of fiscal responsibility in the bill. How on earth can we expect our students to be responsible when the Government cannot be responsible as shown by it bringing forward such a reckless irresponsible bill? 
It is also unrealistic to suggest that students will not change their spending habits. That is naive. Labour members should tell that to the student who has just bought a $400 pair of sunglasses and I know one. 
Hon Marian Hobbs 
: You can’t do that on your student loan. 
KATE WILKINSON 
: This student did and similarly like the bloated education bureaucracy the Working for Families package increases its own bureaucracy. It is plain and simple redistribution. The Government takes the money in higher than necessary taxes and processes it through an expensive bureaucracy. Then if people are lucky and ask nicely some may get it back. But some may not get it back. 
We do not think that is fair we do not think that is reasonable and we do not think that is sensible. We want to encourage responsibility not discourage it as my learned colleague says—and I have a lot of learned colleagues on this side of the Chamber. We want to send the right message to New Zealanders not the wrong messages. We want to give New Zealanders incentives for hard work not to turn them into super-beneficiaries. We need to make working and working harder more rewarding than not working.