Cullen Michael: Taxation (Personal Tax Cuts Annual Rates and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Cullen Michael: Taxation (Personal Tax Cuts Annual Rates and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:647;Page:16330] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 It is with great pleasure that I move  
That the Taxation (Personal Tax Cuts Annual Rates and Remedial Matters) Bill be now read a third time 
. What a fun time we have had in the House since about 5 o’clock yesterday! The National Party started off looking like a bunch of rabbits that had just been rolled over. Mr English told National members not to promise anything because Dr Cullen had actually spent up to the limit. That line was held to very strictly by National Party members for at least 10 to 15 minutes of the debate; they could talk about anything else but they could not make promises. But then Lockwood Smith PhD took over the running of the campaign and suddenly National Party members were fiscally camping it up all over the place as the debate proceeded from then on. He is the man who staunchly opposed the Working for Families package saying it was a terrible insult to New Zealand families. Now it is pretty good and the National Party is supporting the enhancements in this particular bill. Before we had this bill he said that Working for Families was an insult to the average working New Zealander—an insult a terrible thing. 
We have learnt that National Party members have an obsession with cheese. I get the impression—I thought it was only Gerry Brownlee but apparently it is all of them—that their every spare penny is spent on cheese. And they eat it! That party over there is the “Bigger Block Party”. When something goes up in price people should buy more of it. That is the attitude of those members towards family budgets. People should not buy chicken fruit veges or something else that has not gone up in price; they should buy more cheese. That is those members’ approach to life. 
Throughout this debate we have learnt some wonderful things. While National Party members have been arguing away in here and indeed have been fighting to the death a bill they support right down to the final moment—and they will be gone by lunchtime today; they will go off to explain to people that in fact they support this bill to the death and will continue to do so—Mr Key has been out there giving interviews. Mr Key giving an interview is always an exercise in watching the changing picture as it moves along. In the immortal words of John Campbell he is “as slippery as a snake in wet grass.” unable to give a clear answer on anything. Mr Key has given quite different answers from the answers that Dr Lockwood Smith is giving. Dr Lockwood Smith tells us that this tax package is nothing like big enough. It has to be much bigger to satisfy Dr Lockwood Smith; at least three blocks of cheese have to be in this tax package for Dr Lockwood Smith to be satisfied. But the economists are saying that the fiscal package is a bit too stimulatory. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Really. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: “Really.” he says. Yes! That is the trouble with his standing in front of the mirror practising his poses for the House—he forgets to listen to what people are saying out there. When he promises huge blocks of cheese for everybody on 1 April next year he had better understand that they cannot be paid for. 
How will National Party members pay for all of that? They said firstly that they will not rebuild Government House. Well that is fine but it will fall down around their ears if they do not rebuild it. Secondly—and Mr Peters was not here for this—the other great offer-up to pay for much bigger tax cuts is to cancel the increased funding for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: In Sweden. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Well as soon as National Party members become the Government—if they become the Government—that is the plan. I thought that Winston Peters—in case he had some plans about possible arrangements with other political parties—might want to be forewarned in order to have ready the arguments necessary to support his stance on that. Dr Lockwood Smith is happy for Winston Peters to be just the member for Tauranga but he might have other ideas in that regard. 
We learnt more from Mr Key today. We learnt today that Mr Key is now saying he will not change one bit of the Working for Families package. Did Dr Lockwood Smith know that Mr Key had said that? He would not change it one bit. He says that it is badly structured but he will not change it. That is a man with ambition. He is surrounded with things he thinks are badly structured and he says: “I will not change them. I am firm in my resolve to make no impact upon this country moving forward.” That is our friend the Leader of the Opposition. 
And he said clearly that he will not repeal the first tranche of tax cuts. That is brave. They will be in force on 1 October; it is a bit hard to repeal them. What he did not say was that he would keep the second and third tranches. What he did say was: “Well we may have bigger tax cuts but they may not be more expensive.” He said that on the radio this morning: “Well we may have bigger tax cuts but they may not be more expensive.” I can see Mr Tremain trying hard to understand that; he is working out how to get his 4 percent on that particular statement—if he is ever in a National Government. Well it does not add up except if one changes the second and third tranches of this package takes away the increase in the bottom threshold and redistributes it upwards; then there can be a bigger tax cut at the top end that is not more expensive. So the workers will not get more cheese at all—no not even enough for a mousetrap. There will be no more cheese at all but the big cheeses will get all the blocks that are going. That will be the National Party programme running into the election. 
Of course National Party members have also said they will not announce their programme until 4 weeks out from the election. By then there will have been a pre-election fiscal update. They had better be careful about what that might say to them as well about the forward fiscal position. I think it is time for National to start listening to Bill English’s caution rather than following the gambling instincts of Mr Key in this respect. 
We also learnt from Mr Key in the  
New Zealand Herald  
this morning that Government spending is nice but it is sometimes a luxury. What does that mean? In respect of early childhood education is it 20 hours’ free education? Is it support for KiwiSaver? Is it the money to reduce class sizes for new entrants? Is it the money for the cancer vaccine for women? Is it the money for the oral health of children and adolescents? Is it the money that the district health boards require to continue to maintain their services? You see there is not much point in people having an extra half a block of cheese if they cannot afford to go to the doctor to discuss their obesity problems. There is not much point in it at all. 
That is where the National Party is getting it all wrong. Those members do not understand the importance to ordinary families of not being able to afford to go to the doctor of worrying about it costing too much with the result that they do not go and the kids’ illnesses get worse; of worrying about the cost of prescriptions with the result that they do not have scripts filled and they do not take the medicines that they need to take; and of worrying about the cost of sending their kids to early childhood education with the result that their kids do not go and they do not get a good start in life compared with kids from more affluent backgrounds. All of those things matter. Ordinary families do not want to worry about their future retirement income; they do not want to feel unable to afford to save with the result that in retirement they do not have as good a standard of living as other people do. 
We learnt also from Mr Tremain that the National Party does not oppose these tax cuts; it just opposes the Budget. Well what else in the Budget do National Party members oppose? Which bit of this Budget do they oppose apart from the tax cuts? 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: Broadband. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Oh they oppose the broadband roll-out. They oppose a much more efficient way of leveraging broadband growth than throwing $1.5 billion at Telecom New Zealand. They always were the political wing of Telecom and they still are the political wing of Telecom within Parliament. Maurice Williamson has always been the bought and paid for “MP for Telecom” within this House. Our programme of broadband will—for much less money—leverage a result that is just as good in a more competitive environment and that is more technology neutral. So those members should not say that they oppose that one. And they are proposing to spend over a billion dollars more on broadband than the Labour-led Government is planning to spend. 
So is it the money for health? Is it the money for education? Is it the money to improve the lives of superannuitants? What in this Budget do the National Party members oppose? When we know that we will know what they will take off the great bulk of families in New Zealand to make life worse for them then say: “Please be grateful; we have bought you another block of cheese.”