Cullen Michael: New Zealand Superannuation and Veterans’ Pensions (Entitlements of Spouses and Partners of People in Long-term Residential Care and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
Cullen Michael: New Zealand Superannuation and Veterans’ Pensions (Entitlements of Spouses and Partners of People in Long-term Residential Care and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:629;Page:1641] 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Deputy Prime Minister) 
: 
 I begin by thanking all members of the House for so far their support for the bill. Some clearly are more enthusiastically and genuinely supportive than others. 
I would just say to my friend Gordon Copeland that everybody is actually about a year behind everybody else in terms of pay increases once he or she has had his or her last pay increase and that is no different for superannuitants than for anybody else. The formula in that respect in terms of the fixing has not changed in that instance since 1976 when New Zealand superannuation was first introduced under the National Government. It has always been related to wage relativity at the point that it occurs not at some point further down the track. 
I would have to say I was a bit surprised by his call for further increases in Government spending as this morning he was urging me at the Finance and Expenditure Committee to cut Government spending as a proportion of GDP. He appears on occasion to share the strange belief of members opposite that one can increase every item of Government spending but reduce the total in some way or another. It is a very interesting prospect I have to say. 
I want particularly to thank Mrs Barbara White who was the person who really brought this matter to Parliament’s attention and my colleague Lianne Dalziel who is the MP who was most supportive. 
I must say I was very amused by the enthusiastic over-the-top speech in support of Dr Nick Smith by Mr John Key. I am surprised that he had heard of Dr Smith because he thought the member for Wairarapa was Chester Borrows. He said so in his speech. If he is ever going to get the numbers to do Dr Brash he has to learn that Mr Hayes is the MP for Wairarapa and Mr Borrows is the MP for Wanganui. But never mind that is the trouble when one thinks about financial markets rather than one’s colleagues. I gently say to Mr Key that in a few weeks’ time he may want to read that  
Hansard 
 and perhaps dissociate himself rather more from Dr Smith than he was doing this evening. I gently suggest to him that he might care to start distancing himself from one or two of his colleagues on the front bench reasonably early in the process. I am sure he will do that over the next few weeks at some point. [ 
Interruption 
] I say to Mr Henare that what goes around comes around. That is an old rule in this place and the National Party will learn about that old rule some time in the next few weeks. I will now come to the other extraordinary thing about Mr Key. [ 
Interruption 
] Oh yes and it is a lot better too some of it. 
Let me now come to another aspect of Mr Key. When one has been overseas for so many years speculating on the foreign exchange markets one tends to become out of date with what is happening in New Zealand. I just need to bring him up to date very briefly about what has happened with superannuation in the last 15 or so years. Firstly the single living alone allowance was introduced by the last Labour Government. I was the Minister who introduced the single living alone allowance. Secondly the last National Government in 3 out of its 9 years froze New Zealand superannuation and had no annual increase at all. In its last year in Government it legislated to cut the relativity from 65 percent to 60 percent. It had proposed 55 percent but to get Mr Henare’s support and that of one or two others it had to raise it to 60 percent. And there is no question that Dr Brash—because I think he might have said it in detail—actually wanted to go to a relativity of 50 percent of the average wage. National as a whole wanted to go to 55 percent. What was the first thing the incoming Labour Government did? It restored the relativity up to 65 percent and in the end to 67 percent of the average wage. 
Bob Clarkson 
: Thanks very much! 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I know that Mr Clarkson gets all his jokes from old films. He also got most of his money from a Labour Government at some time or another. 
Some of the younger puppies opposite want to start trying to bark and bleat about New Zealand superannuation but they need to know the awful history of their own National Government in that respect. In 3 out of 9 years there was no increase for any superannuitant in the country and the relativity of New Zealand superannuation was cut. The National Government abolished the surcharge only because New Zealand First forced it to. We know that Dr Brash wants to raise again the age of eligibility for New Zealand superannuation. He has given speech after speech saying that the New Zealand superannuation age of eligibility should be raised. Of course that did not stop him from collecting it the moment he turned 65. So dedicated was he to reducing Government spending that instead of simply not collecting the pension he decided to collect it then release a press statement saying he was going to give it to charity. Well he could have saved the taxpayers the money in the first place by simply not collecting the pension. It is not compulsory to take New Zealand superannuation when one turns 65. It is not a legal requirement. 
But let me say again to Mr Key that I advise him very strongly—especially when he is talking about Dr Nick Smith being on the telephone—to be very careful before he associates himself and his future too closely with that of Dr Nick Smith.