Lees-Galloway Iain: Budget Debate 
Lees-Galloway Iain: Budget Debate 
[Volume:654;Page:4170] 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North) 
: 
 A few minutes ago Jo Goodhew was scrounging around for some positive comments about the Budget—maybe from some community organisations—and she found a good one she thought. It was from a union no less; it was from the New Zealand Nurses Organisation. That organisation has congratulated the Government on making the tough call to cancel the tax cuts planned for next year. She crowed about the fact that the Nurses Organisation congratulated the Government on making that call. Well too right the Government had to make that call. 
When the tax cuts were being brought in under urgency before Christmas Labour opposed them. We knew then that they were not affordable. The Government knew then that they were not affordable but it went ahead with them anyway. It was all smoke and mirrors. Government members said: “Look at us; we are doing what we promised. Just wait though till the 100 days of action are over. Just wait for what might come further down the road.” 
It is all well and good to quote the Nurses Organisation but Jo Goodhew got only as far as the first line. One would think that she might have dug a little bit deeper. The headline might just have given it away. It read: “Budget 2009: Tough Calls Some Good Some Bad”. Now there was some more good stuff in the press release. It states: “NZNO welcomes the protected increases in Health.” We very much thank the Nurses Organisation for welcoming the maintenance of a Labour policy. The Government cast this Budget in such a bad light that the fact that it managed to simply maintain a Labour policy has people in the community throwing their arms up and saying: “Hallelujah! They haven’t started cuts on that bit anyway.” 
But when we go deeper into the statement we see that it reads: “NZNO assesses this budget most for its likely impact on jobs.” The press release goes on to state: “NZNO is very concerned the large cuts announced in government departments’ spending will drive a continuing haemorrhage of jobs …‘If work being done is no longer deemed to be required there are plenty of new challenges these skilled workers would be better applied to than throwing them onto the dole … We remain deeply concerned about the funding for residential age care … We are also unclear as to how the funding will be distributed and calculated’ said Annals.” There were some good and some bad calls in the Budget. 
Grant Robertson 
: Jo Goodhew didn’t read that out. 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY 
: That is right. She completely missed that bit. She did not get past the first line. There were some good and some bad calls in the Budget. 
Actually it was about time the Nurses Organisation offered a fairly favourable press release for the Government because just a few days earlier a press release reported that “The New Zealand Nurses Organisation (NZNO) expects Thursday’s Budget will focus on strengthening the economy and hopes it does so through a focus on jobs;”. Well everybody was hoping there would be a focus on jobs were they not? But it was completely lacking. It was completely missing. 
Just a few days before that came a press release entitled: “Nurses Disappointed by Government’s Disregard for Fairness” which was about the scrapping of the Pay and Employment Equity Unit. The Nurses Organisation had worked on very closely on that with the previous Government and had achieved some very useful beneficial and tangible results. 
It is bad enough that this Budget is the Budget of broken promises. It is bad enough that John Key and Bill English told New Zealanders they could have their cake and eat it too. It is bad enough that John Key and Bill English said there would be tax cuts this year next year and the year after. It is bad enough that John Key went out and told Kiwis that National would not tamper with the superannuation scheme. It was his personal commitment that there would be no tampering with the superannuation scheme. It is bad enough that Bill English has committed intergenerational theft by gutting KiwiSaver and ruining of the superannuation scheme by getting rid of the payment to the fund formerly known as the Cullen fund. 
But what is really deplorable about this Budget is the fact that it is completely devoid of any kind of vision for New Zealand. That is the worst kind of intergenerational theft. It is anti-aspirational. It is riddled with short-term expedient thinking and it was written by a Minister who frankly seems unnaturally comfortable with the idea that he will not be held accountable for its real effects on future generations of New Zealanders—not while he holds a ministerial warrant anyway. 
There are people out there who do have a vision. In my home electorate of Palmerston North there are people who have a very strong vision of where they would like New Zealand to go. They want New Zealand to be a world leader in food technology and innovation that brings together private sector research State-funded research and academic food science experts from across the world. They want to be a magnet for economic development in this country. Those people have a vision of New Zealand as highly skilled and as a high-wage economy. They have a vision that research science and technology can be the driving force not only of New Zealand’s recovery from this recession but of genuinely sustainable improvement in living conditions for all New Zealanders. All they ask is that they be taken seriously. 
But this Government in this Budget has shown that it does not take research science and technology seriously. It would like us to think so but the truth is that research science and technology has been one of the very big losers in this Budget. To be fair I note that there have been small increases in some areas but those increases have been offset by massive funding cuts across the board. 
The Government claims that through substantial additional funding this Budget recognises the critical role that science and technology play in the economic recovery. At best that is misleading and at worst—and it is a theme of this Budget—it is just plain dishonest. Although the Minister of Research Science and Technology has trumpeted small increases in some areas the real story consists of cuts in tertiary education the abolition of Labour’s research and development tax credits the gutting of the Fast Forward Fund and the smallest increase in Vote Research Science and Technology in years. The Minister claims substantial extra funding of $128 million but in fact the Vote Research Science and Technology funding has increased by only $25 million. That was paid for by slashing $630 million from the sector and by abolishing Labour’s research and development tax credits. 
The Government has stripped more than $600 million in funding from the research science and technology sector and it has the gall to call it an increase. This does not even taken into account the cuts to Labour’s Fast Forward Fund. In February National promised that its replacement for the Fast Forward Fund would be equal to or better than Labour’s but the fund unveiled by National is not only worth $800 million less to the sector but also lacks one of the most critical aspects of Labour’s fund which is long-term certainty of funding. Labour’s Fast Forward Fund guaranteed stable research funding for the food and pastoral sectors for the next 10 to 15 years. Under National’s poor imitation this critical sector will have to queue cap in hand year after year to get its funding. That is not good enough and it shows no vision whatsoever for a country that has a high-wage high-earning high living - standards economy. 
This country needs jobs. As the Nurses Organisation pointed out it needs good-quality jobs. The research science and technology sector has the potential to deliver good-quality jobs. When we develop new technologies we should not simply try to sell them off overseas. We as a nation should be trying to get in behind the people who develop new technologies and we should be trying to keep here in New Zealand any manufacturing that comes out of new technologies. We cannot compete with China on quantity but we can compete on quality. 
Focusing on quality supports a high-wage economy. We need to support start-up companies so that new technology can be the harbinger of manufacturing opportunities. The period between the development of a new technology and taking it out to commercialisation is called the “Valley of Death”. Where in this Budget is the support for people who have created a new technology and want to take it out to commercialise it for the benefit of all Kiwis? There is no support in the Budget whatsoever. There is no vision. 
When the economy inevitably turns round New Zealand needs to be ready. We need new technologies new products and people with the skills to produce them. But there is no vision and we will be left behind. Universities and polytechs have received in real terms a funding cut from this Budget yet they are experiencing massive growth at the moment. People want to get into tertiary education. They would rather do that than line up in the dole queue. They want to get the skills they need in order be ready for the time when New Zealand is back on its feet and able to drive forward its economy. 
This Government works on the basis of false dichotomies. It says on the one hand that there is not room for research science and development to the environment— 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I am sorry to interrupt the member but his time has expired.