O'Connor Damien: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
O'Connor Damien: Taxation (GST and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Procedure Third Reading 
[Volume:669;Page:16165] 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR (Labour) 
: 
 I have not participated in this debate but after coming down to the Chamber listening to the discussion and looking at the bill—and I acknowledge the good work my colleagues are doing here—I will take a call on Part 6. The bill states that its intentions are to remove tax avoidance opportunities to have better alignment to maintain the integrity and fairness of the goods and services tax and obviously here in Part 6 to make some amendments to the Stamp and Cheque Duties Act 1971.  
I was recently in Victoria in Australia. A previous speaker in this debate said that he understood that stamp duties in Australia are quite significant but he was not sure of the amount. My understanding is that if one sells a house in Victoria the stamp duty is either 4 or 5 percent and it is paid directly to the state Government. That is in the land of opportunity the wonderful country that this Government has chosen to compare us to. The Prime Minister has said on many many occasions that we have to step up and match Australia. Well here is an opportunity to align with Australia. I do not think that anyone and certainly not the Labour Party would advocate the introduction of a 5 percent stamp duty on the sale of property.  
I have a question and it is one that the Finance and Expenditure Committee could have teased out if it had had the time to go through this bill. How can Victoria in Australia the country we have to aspire to match have stamp duty of 5 percent and still maintain a high level of income and a high level of economic activity and indeed to choose the Prime Minister’s words be a better place to live? That is what the Prime Minister has said on many occasions. He has said that that is what we should be looking for.  
In relation to non-resident withholding tax and the alignment with Australia my colleagues have said that we must align with Australia as much as possible so that we remove the distortions and I think that most of us have accepted that that is a good direction in which to move. What then is the issue of stamp duty in terms of its impact on the relative prosperity of either country? Is it a good thing or a bad thing? We have been told that less tax is always good except that this Government has put up taxes in a whole lot of areas. It has not just increased GST but also it has put up taxes on petrol and charges for vehicle registration.  
I ask the Minister in the chair the Hon Georgina te Heuheu—should she choose to take a call—to tell us how the amendments to the Stamp and Cheque Duties Act will bring about an alignment between Australia and New Zealand. How is it that Australia can have such high stamp duties as well as GST and a whole lot of other things and still be better off than New Zealand? Will the changes we are making in this legislation and in the rushed Supplementary Order Paper make a significant improvement to the tax regime or to the way we operate the system in this country?  
I will not say any more than that other than to say that it is a question I asked a few weeks ago in Australia. I have now had the opportunity to ask the Minister. Perhaps she could take a call and tell us. Maybe she does not know or maybe she might acknowledge that the select committee might have found out. But of course we are rushing this legislation through unnecessarily. I am sure that the changes in Part 6 will be amended in the very near future because we are not going through this in a thorough way. Thank you Mr Chairperson.