"\u003C!DOCTYPE html\u003E\u003Chtml xmlns:xlink=\u0022http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\u0022 xmlns:xsi=\u0022http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance\u0022 xmlns:mml=\u0022http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\u0022\u003E\n  \u003Chead\u003E\n    \u003CMETA http-equiv=\u0022Content-Type\u0022 content=\u0022text/html; charset=utf-16\u0022\u003E\n    \u003Cmeta name=\u0022viewport\u0022 content=\u0022width=device-width, initial-scale=1\u0022\u003E\n  \u003C/head\u003E\n  \u003Cbody style=\u0022font-family:sans-serif; font-size:100%;\u0022\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022250c251ef44a34edb6ed88e918c0ca2b\u0022\u003EWednesday, 25 March 2026\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EThe Speaker\u003C/span\u003E took the Chair at 2 p.m.\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022faf6879c0865b0c0c3568f6202b57723\u0022\u003EStart of Sitting Day\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022986aace006a92b7dc79bf4308d134634\u0022\u003EKarakia/Prayers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022 data-id=\u002204525a54f51200d21544ddc4a31fe546\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002204525a54f51200d21544ddc4a31fe546\u0022\u003EBARBARA KURIGER (Deputy Speaker) (14:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Almighty God, we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests, we acknowledge the King and pray for guidance in our deliberations, that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom, justice, mercy, and humility for the welfare and the peace of New Zealand. Amen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e5e3c1bec5492d053213b92686ac0faa\u0022\u003EVisitors\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b80d912c3bf735de8c638017cdd1c546\u0022\u003EKiribati\u2014Public Accounts Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022 data-id=\u002272e6b5a93df6d25771b9f3e7f0f5eb72\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002272e6b5a93df6d25771b9f3e7f0f5eb72\u0022\u003ESPEAKER (14:01)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m sure that members would wish to welcome the Public Accounts Committee from the Kiribati House of Assembly, who are present in the gallery.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e6721932c17314273d8347cefc6a992f\u0022\u003EPresentation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a38b242aaada7efe3865963bacae23df\u0022\u003EPapers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022 data-id=\u0022777ec2347036e091ea43c319df906fdb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022777ec2347036e091ea43c319df906fdb\u0022\u003ESPEAKER (14:01)\u003C/span\u003E: No petitions have been delivered. A paper has been delivered for presentation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002248bca53faa99964af84f6421394b87e4\u0022\u003ECLERK (14:01): \u003C/span\u003ECreative New Zealand amended statement of performance expectations 2025-26.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f99adca73467320239ced03fcfb9931d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I present the report of the Controller and Auditor-General entitled \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ESupporting people in immediate housing need\u003C/span\u003E. Those papers are published under the authority of the House. No select committee reports have been delivered to the Clerk for presentation. No bills have been introduced. The House comes to oral questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002215fe6180b4ee1d8f53d8c00bf600180f\u0022\u003EOral Questions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00225351aff77cc637624b674ee9713ef56e\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002266db3bc1d121de27aa6bcc0f4a38993d\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 1\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022 data-id=\u0022c9f7a224e86f8dd08b6e2b9942dcca1c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c9f7a224e86f8dd08b6e2b9942dcca1c\u0022\u003ECHL\u00D6E SWARBRICK (Co-Leader\u2014Green) (14:01)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EE tautoko ana ia i ng\u0101 k\u014Drero me ng\u0101 mahi katoa a t\u014Dna K\u0101wanatanga?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EDoes he stand by all of his Government\u2019s statements and actions?\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022 data-id=\u002269a7479816eb12140353cae56fed4790\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002269a7479816eb12140353cae56fed4790\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister) (14:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022734c7f05bf0bbd991f9383f7e3406571\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister agree with Fitch Ratings, who have recently downgraded the country\u2019s credit outlook, that our economy has \u201Ca substantial dependence on energy imports\u201D and, therefore, an increased vulnerability to shocks like the one New Zealanders are currently facing, and, if so, can he see that increasing our reliance on fossil fuels makes us less resilient?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a8c4ce39429591617b22c14132e0e3fe\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: I think the Fitch report highlights again why financial discipline is so very, very important, as is good responsible economic management in volatile and uncertain times. It\u2019s a good reminder of why this Government has taken on board the mistakes of the COVID management plan, which led to a 32-year high in inflation and a tripling of our debt. That is what this Government is very conscious about as we navigate this fuel crisis.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2d48cf0564819495b83079e6ba7b693\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: How much has the global price of liquefied natural gas (LNG) increased since the start of the US and Israel\u2019s war on Iran?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229b1079f3b6b7ef5354bc2709b0e23e4\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: I don\u2019t have that number right at hand today, but I just say to you that, yes, there is no doubt about it, LNG prices have increased around the world.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022987cd85f1dceb4702e564ac6175c2ddf\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: Will his Government\u2019s billion-dollar decision to build an LNG import terminal make our country more or less reliant on energy imports?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f00d68aa5fcd737566ec3acd8a6827ce\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, no disrespect, but that is a member who delivered a failed energy policy\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022238618f1c02a7b3c55444ad7fb6207bc\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Just a moment, Prime Minister. We want to hear from the Prime Minister, not the cheerleading crowd from the back.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eaf413f196cacaefd02b66a76f639a53\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: With all respect, as I said, that is a member who, as part of a former Government, delivered a failed energy policy that saw this country making a rather unique transition from domestic gas to imported international coal. It had a Lake Onslow project at $17 billion\u2014$8,000 for every single household in the country\u2014that led to an $800 megawatt per hour price in wholesale electricity prices. What we are doing, as I\u2019ve previously explained, is we\u2019re dealing with the dry-year risk, lowering the risk premium, and therefore wanting to lower power bills by $50 for every household.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223967d5dfb2b0e044851a2901b36282b3\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: Does he agree with the Infrastructure Commission, who warned, \u201CImporting LNG may be a commercial option for some, but it isn\u2019t clear that it would lower average electricity prices\u201D, and, if so, why is he committing billions of dollars of New Zealanders\u2019 money to a project that won\u2019t even lower their bills and will increase our vulnerability to fossil fuel shocks like the one we\u2019re currently experiencing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022415b5af1fd6348b60d66b5529537b338\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: You can ask a question; you can\u2019t make a statement like that in a question. The Prime Minister may respond.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002215510e6e03be98eb906a0f2e74e2ca2f\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I just disagree with the assertion in that question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002216d311036d4c2087cde6a8d6367142c9\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: Did banning oil and gas exploration within New Zealand\u2019s territory make us more or less dependent on energy imports, and, if less, what is the Government doing about it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226566aa879814320afc380cebae3999fc\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it meant that New Zealand is the only country I know of that\u2019s making the rather unique transition from domestic gas to international coal, and, in the process, worsening emissions. But that is a function of a failed Labour-Greens energy policy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea5bb5e01982fdcdefb76c71b76c4cf5\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: Does burning coal\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f380fcbae63fc8961ab306b66f7a3571\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, just a moment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002200d9869366e2ebd44a5ce96066bcb07c\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: Does burning coal to generate electricity increase or decrease New Zealand\u2019s emissions\u2014something that I would have thought would be of great concern to the other side of the House?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260475c095d8b433b2a9685078d10fc89\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: I think, actually, burning international Indonesian coal is about twice as bad as using domestic gas. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f007a1fa62819e6c3ca5451f3d591e84\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Chl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u2014and no one else.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229340db0d6051493982fc3db81fee975a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc976b543c1c1be901fe5ec1ace1d6ca\u0022\u003EChl\u00F6e Swarbrick\u003C/span\u003E: What will it take for him to cancel this billion-dollar, fossil fuel dependence - fostering LNG infrastructure, if not calls from economists and experts to can the project and instead invest that money in renewables?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221259b6a293e86ccfe1fcac78b48565cb\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I just would say in response to the second part of the question that this is a country experiencing a renewables boom. We are seeing a huge investment in renewables. Just think about this Government: you know, we\u2019re in the process of approving a project in Southland that will deliver renewable energy to 100,000 homes, which the Labour-Greens Government didn\u2019t approve. So we have a renewables boom under way\u2014that\u2019s great\u2014but we also have to manage dry-year risk and take the risk premium out and lower power bills for people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00228d9d0c53c899dad5c56e416f30e0690b\u0022\u003EFinance\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c2a5fe731f4b4b72ff94b1ecbb6c742c\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022 data-id=\u0022f249f0af1a4d08d34f71483977950a61\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f249f0af1a4d08d34f71483977950a61\u0022\u003EDAN BIDOIS (National\u2014Northcote) (14:06)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Finance\u003C/span\u003E: What recent reports has she seen on New Zealand\u2019s fiscal position?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u00220980473facd13c210807193d73a17aa3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220980473facd13c210807193d73a17aa3\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance) (14:07)\u003C/span\u003E: As I mentioned yesterday, Fitch Ratings has confirmed New Zealand\u2019s foreign currency rating at AA\u002B but revised the outlook from \u201Cstable\u201D to \u201Cnegative\u201D. Fitch is concerned about delays in fiscal consolidation and debt reduction, due to weaker than expected economic growth. It observed that conflict in the Middle East poses further risk to the New Zealand economy, citing inflationary effects from fuel imports and a broader global weakening. A negative outlook is a warning; it is a reminder of why keeping a tight rein on spending, getting back to surplus, and bending the debt curve over is so important, even when global events make this more challenging.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e727a965ccd8c271a97170716762cf70\u0022\u003EDan Bidois\u003C/span\u003E: What has the Government been doing to get the books back in order?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022507c6aadd11e5c89ba054b20160ee617\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Over the past two years, the Government has pursued a balanced fiscal strategy: lifting investment in front-line services like health, education, and law and order, while charting a credible path back to surplus. That increased investment has largely been funded from savings elsewhere across Government. In total, we have made $43 billion worth of savings across the last two Budgets, with further savings planned in Budget 2026. Any slippage in our fiscal targets has occurred because of forecast revisions outside the Government\u2019s immediate control, not because of discretionary spending or revenue decisions. Unlike the last finance Minister, I stick to my operating allowances.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002261d731f6b6eb3c1dfc6394c8f4f688d8\u0022\u003EDan Bidois\u003C/span\u003E: What is the impact of the Middle East conflict on the Government\u2019s books?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a8c9ef00e2ec7d87e5397566a584112e\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: It is one thing\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b93f0a52dec255861280d5bc8788ea91\u0022\u003EHon Carmel Sepuloni\u003C/span\u003E: How bad was it before?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002281ba965fd452f53909393deeffe42407\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: \u201CHow bad was it before?\u201D, Carmel Sepuloni asks. It was very bad under Labour, and New Zealanders voted in recognition of that. It is one thing to consider what this conflict means for the New Zealand economy\u2014and there is a lot of uncertainty about that, and I recommend that members look at the Reserve Bank Governor\u2019s speech from yesterday, as she talks about these issues in a very considered way\u2014and it is another step again to work out the impact of the conflict on the Government\u2019s books, both on revenue and on expenses. Treasury\u2019s next fiscal forecast will be released alongside the Budget in May, and I expect a number of different scenarios will be presented. What I do know is that this conflict won\u2019t result in a windfall gain of hundreds of millions of dollars in extra GST, as some have alleged; that is simply economic illiteracy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222eeb6909284ae715f183cc6312cf2007\u0022\u003EDan Bidois\u003C/span\u003E: How prepared is New Zealand for an economic shock?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c3e414ca4bc84583e84f925570558bf4\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: New Zealand is vulnerable to economic shocks, natural disasters, and global events\u2014as we are seeing starkly at the moment. New Zealand can deal with such shocks. What I would say is that we have a lot less room than we did a few years ago because our rainy day fund, essentially, got emptied out over COVID\u2014and the rainy days keep coming. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] Net core Crown debt rose markedly as a proportion of GDP, and forecasts made before the Middle East conflict showed debt getting close to the debt\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222344441593346553cae788b1c14c7eaf\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, that\u2019s got to stop. Just sitting in your seat and yelling at the top of your voice makes the person yelling look a little bit ridiculous and disengaged. The member will finish the answer with no comment from the rest of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223fd9deb66b8bf462684c4f30b654bcae\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Net core Crown debt rose markedly as a proportion of GDP, and forecasts made before the Middle East conflict show debt getting close to the debt ceiling of 50 percent of GDP\u2014that is the debt ceiling recommended by Treasury. In the future, it would be much better to go into the equivalent of a global financial crisis or Canterbury earthquake with debt comfortably below 50 percent of GDP rather than uncomfortably above it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002269403e5d4bcdb072d0f8ace4e6f6affd\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f5ed75e5d6c87f63c5d308d20a5c33e3\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 3\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022 data-id=\u00226407fa04bbb4eb502578621c0e937578\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226407fa04bbb4eb502578621c0e937578\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the Opposition) (14:11)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by all of his Government\u2019s statements and actions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022 data-id=\u0022efcc04224acc759c33ebb99e7e141966\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022efcc04224acc759c33ebb99e7e141966\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister) (14:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c727392752ce41ddd09b9dfe59fd3ac7\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: What would trigger a move from response level 1 to response level 2 on the Government\u2019s fuel emergency response framework?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022903cb5b79912deaabbc4673e60356f38\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: The member will be informed about that as we announce that towards the end of this week.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022570e3d9ea560048419b5911361dee180\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: How many days of fuel supply would New Zealand need to have left before the Government moved to level 2 on the fuel emergency response framework?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a5930961b398c610de1a5cc7eaa06fe\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: As I just said in my first answer, that will be revealed later this week.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002282f0c67681004b53b7bc027bdfde0ef0\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: How will the Government prioritise fuel supplies to critical customers under level 2?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002276a84d8542c4fb026328bb561ca1e328\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Again, I\u2019ve got nothing further to add to my previous answers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c2dbca0a759430b40d5cf79581048b2e\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Will petrol stations be expected to check the eligibility of critical customers at level 2; if not, how will the Government ensure that critical customers are prioritised?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b36461fa4728b55b478a989e76eecd1\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: As I just said to the member, the phases of our National Fuel Plan and how they will be considered will be discussed on Friday.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1b20dafe9e5a8bc479345697f22bf23\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Prime Minister confirm that Ministers are giving careful consideration to many of the issues raised by the Leader of the Opposition, because what the New Zealand public deserves is a thorough, comprehensive, evidence-led plan rather than just sound bites?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a015ad077ad7785837e6d4067d3af1f\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and that\u2019s why, as we have previously foreshadowed in statements, we will talk about our National Fuel Plan on Friday.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf0d887795d4603e5a8a44c3903f29ba\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Who will determine who is a critical customer, and how will people be informed whether or not they are one?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aff8793bba140e4cc24aed04daf62dae\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Look, I appreciate the member\u2019s questions, but, as we\u2019ve just outlined, we were taking the development of a National Fuel Plan very seriously, and we will outline our approach to that on Friday.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228548045321f3782f517dfd3ed4b0b932\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Will petrol stations be prohibited from supplying petrol and diesel to non-essential customers under level 2, and, if not, how will they ensure that essential customers are prioritised?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022806167920d92441a83e41b39d3a9ee9b\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member for his question, but I refer him to my previous answers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002206f157ecd44a758cb48a2ba9037bcdab\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Why, after almost a month since the war in Iran began, can the Government not answer basic questions about its own response framework that was published over two years ago?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e429b21fb7b0d77dd734612a68b0b10c\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Because, unlike what we observed under a previous Government, we have learnt the lessons of COVID mismanagement. We are making sure that we are doing it appropriately and with industry on board, and we will deliver that, as I said, on Friday, as we foreshadowed last week.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022635ae19f8c666c090327032eb23aea2e\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. I wonder, Mr Speaker, if you would allow the Prime Minister to answer that question again, this time so we can hear him giving the answer and not being shouted down by the questioner.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002280e193a0b028fc023b60196d07984e2c\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s something I could consider, but I\u2019m not going to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022989800f3b89ad8b6b3149c3ed04c85e8\u0022\u003EInfrastructure\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022125fb3a81377643bcd33f0afa41594cc\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 4\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022 data-id=\u0022ebb8e00d5dc395282730f1ed9b1371f5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ebb8e00d5dc395282730f1ed9b1371f5\u0022\u003ERYAN HAMILTON (National\u2014Hamilton East) (14:14)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister for Infrastructure\u003C/span\u003E: What updates has he seen on the Fast-track Approvals Act?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022 data-id=\u0022b799f263fbc61276667fbb3578a75554\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b799f263fbc61276667fbb3578a75554\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP (Minister for Infrastructure) (14:14)\u003C/span\u003E: Excellent progress: after just over a year, fast track has consented 14 projects in total, and 20 projects have expert panels appointed. Including referred projects, there are 43 projects currently progressing through fast track up and down the country. As we face an uncertain global context, with large impacts on us here at home, there\u2019s never been a more important time with growth-enhancing regional and national projects around the country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022381dfbbe9e9bdda41f4ec3aae94b8ce1\u0022\u003ERyan Hamilton\u003C/span\u003E: How long are these fast-track projects taking to consent?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214c60485e2a4710e5aa2e87fcb376074\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: On average, it\u2019s taking 128 working days for decisions on substantive applications from when officials determine an application is complete and in scope. I\u2019ll give you one example: Green Steel, a recently approved steel manufacturing plant, using\u2014listen up, Chl\u00F6e\u2014recycled steel, said it would have taken a minimum of six years to take the project through the Resource Management Act (RMA) consenting process; under fast track, just seven months. Kings Quarry said that using fast track instead of the RMA saved them three years in consenting time. Their project was approved in just over six months. These are great projects for New Zealand and are saving time and money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227082628a0434d0585b2a052a0710b06\u0022\u003ERyan Hamilton\u003C/span\u003E: What benefits do some of these approved fast-track projects bring?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273d0d34d6e429a1300119f1cb4fc26a5\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP\u003C/span\u003E: Applicants have to explain the level of regional and national benefits they will deliver. Take the Green Steel project, which I know the member who\u2019s asking the question is interested in: they expect it will create about 200 skilled jobs in the region. Arataki, the new housing development in Hawke\u2019s Bay\u2014200 new residential allotments\u2014estimates it will create over 630 jobs over the five-year development period during construction. There are many other projects, with many other jobs attached to them, that I look forward to updating the House on in due course.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e07d981996485f81474f80f6a7561388\u0022\u003EJustice\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d2d3b64016cf1963cdb04268b75fdf4b\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 5\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221a30b7d60a03452cb9b736efc6896cdb\u0022 data-id=\u00228785e50a5bccda9e0fa54e15a2518268\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a30b7d60a03452cb9b736efc6896cdb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228785e50a5bccda9e0fa54e15a2518268\u0022\u003EDr PARMJEET PARMAR (ACT) (14:16)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EAssociate Minister of Justice\u003C/span\u003E: What recent announcements has she made regarding alcohol law reform?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002216829a90e47644e3809ecc77bed3916d\u0022 data-id=\u002289840569ff71c33f79a8cadf1f869d17\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002216829a90e47644e3809ecc77bed3916d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002289840569ff71c33f79a8cadf1f869d17\u0022\u003EHon NICOLE McKEE (Associate Minister of Justice) (14:16)\u003C/span\u003E: I recently introduced the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Improving Alcohol Regulation) Amendment Bill to the House. This bill makes a series of changes which will free New Zealanders and businesses from the stranglehold of red tape and will support economic growth. Changes within the bill will make the licensing process fairer, make it easier to host events, and cut the red tape affecting everything, from hairdressers to major concerts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a30b7d60a03452cb9b736efc6896cdb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd57193a7ced9cb8c082434e7ec701b3\u0022\u003EDr Parmjeet Parmar\u003C/span\u003E: What will be the impact of these changes?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002216829a90e47644e3809ecc77bed3916d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002210aae58e2a3e784f74dfd4e84fe0cb1e\u0022\u003EHon NICOLE McKEE\u003C/span\u003E: These changes will deliver clear benefits for Kiwis and Kiwi businesses. They restore businesses\u2019 certainty by stopping out-of-area objections to licences, returning the system to fairness and practicality. They support communities by making it easier to host events and empowering clubs to serve the wider public, should they choose to change their licence. They also strengthen safeguards around rapid alcohol delivery to protect against sales to minors and intoxicated people. In short, these reforms cut red tape, back local decision-making, and take practical steps towards keeping our communities safe.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a30b7d60a03452cb9b736efc6896cdb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022df9b18e9aa99bf5cd3adfb06d467f984\u0022\u003EDr Parmjeet Parmar\u003C/span\u003E: What support has she seen for these changes?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002216829a90e47644e3809ecc77bed3916d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022db4cd1e94cc3a694c2aceca18a9f73a2\u0022\u003EHon NICOLE McKEE\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve seen strong support for these changes. Hospitality New Zealand chief executive Kristy Phillips has said that \u201Cthe proposed changes are common-sense amendments\u201D and that they \u201Creturn some balance into what has become an arduous process.\u201D The Brewers Association of New Zealand executive director Dylan Firth said the bill represents \u201Ca practical step toward modernising New Zealand\u2019s alcohol laws.\u201D New Zealand Winegrowers chief executive Philip Gregan voiced his support for limiting licence objections to those within the same council area, stating that \u201CThis is a sensible change that ensures that a business cannot have its licence impacted by unconnected objectors.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a30b7d60a03452cb9b736efc6896cdb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002257ed50b2a8c4f06aba2bfd3ff46a0614\u0022\u003EDr Parmjeet Parmar\u003C/span\u003E: What changes are being made to the objection process for liquor licence applications and renewals?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002216829a90e47644e3809ecc77bed3916d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ecf2a5f064167fdd60221910d52d4220\u0022\u003EHon NICOLE McKEE\u003C/span\u003E: The bill limits objections to those who live or work in the local council area or within 1 kilometre of the proposed licence. I\u2019ve spoken with business owners dealing with objections from the other end of the country and even some from overseas, creating real cost and uncertainty. In one case, a venue spent $45,000 preparing for a hearing that the objector didn\u2019t even turn up for. Objections should reflect the views of directly affected people who live in the community who cannot simply opt out. This change restores a basic principle: those who live with the consequences get a say; those at a distance do not. I thank Dr Parmjeet Parmar for her strong advocacy on this issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a30b7d60a03452cb9b736efc6896cdb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002279a579d52508d4350d2e36b5d931c36f\u0022\u003EDr Parmjeet Parmar\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary, Mr Speaker?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e5ec40a026e5dfad6eb624f6ccf7470\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, OK, but we\u2019ve got to tighten up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a30b7d60a03452cb9b736efc6896cdb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002291d15d01d7b0d26d44a07bb1f9f991b5\u0022\u003EDr Parmjeet Parmar\u003C/span\u003E: How does this bill tie into the Government\u2019s other reforms impacting the sale and supply of alcohol?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002216829a90e47644e3809ecc77bed3916d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002285dadf1a91b9fced0d366ad490d2413d\u0022\u003EHon NICOLE McKEE\u003C/span\u003E: The ongoing hospitality sector regulatory review, announced by the Hon David Seymour, is likely to recommend further complementary reforms and I look forward to its final report. I\u2019m also aware of a member\u2019s bill proposing changes to the Act. My bill does not address those issues, but I welcome those proposed reforms, particularly the amendment from my colleague Cameron Luxton, which will ensure hospitality venues can remain accessible to make the most of the opening of Christchurch\u2019s new stadium. Together, these reforms paint a very bright future for the hospitality sector.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f3968caacd2cdea18054463ac33ad4d1\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. As much as I welcome commentary in this House on amendments to my member\u2019s bill, that is not a matter for the Government. The question was \u201CWhat is this Government doing?\u201D They shouldn\u2019t be talking about members\u2019 bills.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002298a0d02f6f9152ff0191a314dbabff50\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that\u2019s true, apart from the fact that she explained that it wasn\u2019t a part of her bill, but she did, as a Minister, welcome the amendment. I don\u2019t think that\u2019s too far out of order. It certainly calls attention to the member\u2019s bill, which a lot of people might, now, be interested in reading.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229328238781c21ae33edcd08bf4249ba4\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Well, she didn\u2019t mention it but now she has, so it\u2019s perfect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ca1281f29bd77523d996b3bf5980183b\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s good.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002296741dd185684e785796af3f87e39812\u0022\u003EEnergy\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fb0363a4a671b52975193525f5cf908d\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u0022ace79da222e28ff8a772fa5789b48dcc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ace79da222e28ff8a772fa5789b48dcc\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (14:21)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EAssociate Minister for Energy\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by his answers to oral question No. 7 on 24 March 2026?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022 data-id=\u002241f89c53bb24ee14dc2208efeaf35a50\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002241f89c53bb24ee14dc2208efeaf35a50\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES (Associate Minister for Energy) (14:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, including that the past Labour Government made a reckless decision in approving the closure of the Marsden Point refinery.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022175c8c7b58e0303d22cb3377ea60404e\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003ERepeated lie.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002288ee06b82a8f19f59985c36ec04483d1\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Can I just stop you there\u2014no more of that. That\u2019s quite enough.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224070bf5b727f7de5ed31a517f248e0db\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Well, no more of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff81086262b7450ec41b356ca85fc705\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m sorry\u2014if you want to debate it come into the Chamber and debate it in the proper fashion. Don\u2019t make those accusations.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b300e6dd53f9c41f8184a2dd283cb74d\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. A Minister cannot begin an answer with an attack on the Opposition, particularly when that is simply not true. Shane Jones continues to assert something that is not true. The Labour Government did not approve the closure of Marsden Point; it was a private business.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c66eacb11c534dd3a48917cb69e2841f\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. I think people understand that, but the question was: did he stand by all his answers? And he, then, basically quoted himself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002219dd573e95d79a33a329197067945e70\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: Why did he tell the House yesterday there was no budget for a diesel reserve, when officials had identified a surplus of almost $50 million in the fuel levy fund, rising to around $110 million by 2025, specifically there to pay for fuel resilience measures, like the diesel reserve?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8d2a4aa1798250e3c8a6638d6609a0d\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, the former Minster did leave some squiggles on a Cabinet paper. There was, however, no well-developed proposal and, I just want to remind the House that it was September 2021 when the Labour Cabinet approved the closure of the refinery, and then it took until\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212daf729c8d4dd683240d20c2ffd43e6\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No\u2014sorry. You can\u2019t make an accusation like that. The Cabinet paper may well have considered a matter like that, but I doubt it\u2019s got the word \u201Capproved\u201D or \u201Cdisapproved\u201D on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002234d33be98744f6685ef0523582da43b9\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022844aa656ed4954af1d350e34955c1030\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019re making a point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d1078a1ba5fb2cbf9ef21042fd86a79d\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, so, I\u2019d like to make a point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba02e5b0a00ed03e6351060846172cac\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes. Very good.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c6113952328317342a23e0e38b28e8a3\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: Could we ask the Clerk to consult the dictionary and confirm that the matua is correct: \u201Cagreed\u201D need not mean \u201Coffering permission or consent\u201D? I took the good liberty of consulting that great paragon of knowledge, the dictionary, before I came here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002227ab9b2a62a13db091386dc3bec1857d\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fd308c59e39428c605132fcb815c1303\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re on a point of order. Yes, we\u2019ll do that\u2014it\u2019ll be interesting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229373bfd6bd783ba3aee4f831ddf3919f\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: On the definition that Shane Jones is now creating, the McCain Foods factory, the Wattie\u2019s factory, the Kinleith factory, the Winstone factory have all been closed\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222bf3212f17a44878791957bb7a53e22d\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220000f0c9f261cf94de6d4b79b0185b0e\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014by this Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226437eb7cfb06bd849bdb1f8d3cc3e2c7\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022785cf7218760d3e9fe8d66b92b640e40\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ecca7967c3332ea7af8771336ae82659\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: I can assure the House I have presented no Cabinet paper agreeing with the closure of Wattie\u2019s or the closure of McCain Foods, but I can table a Cabinet paper where they agreed to close the refinery.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002290f31512d149cc8f9aeb5c8401aab13b\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: As of today, how much money sits in the petroleum or engine fuel monitoring levy memorandum account?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022665ab2087e88f479e29d028baa975fb9\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: That account is dedicated to a range of expenses, and if the member would like to write me a letter without squiggles, I shall provide a detailed answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a42370f96283a844e55f7a467d40d7e8\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: Why did he claim yesterday that 700 million litres of storage was closed down at Marsden when hundreds of millions of litres of fuel are stored at Marsden Point today and the real loss of fuel security was his decision to cancel a 70\u00A0million litre diesel reserve?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b4ff682bf572dfda2dadeea08ce315cc\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: Sadly, New Zealand is labouring under a shortage of capacity to store fuel. You cannot lay that problem at any other place than the feet of that woman, who approved the closure of the refinery.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d04a470fdd41964f91707ca35062175\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, sorry; you know that under the Standing Orders you can\u2019t make that sort of accusation to the House, and I\u2019d ask you to withdraw that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a99809efb12129ed69ae3cd29366e838\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: I withdraw it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249105a1cfcdaec8722d38f245f81ec78\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Mr Speaker, with the greatest respect, if you read the document in 2021, it is as plain as daylight they are being asked \u201CWhat are the consequences if we make this decision? Will it be a crisis for this country?\u201D\u2014or words to that effect\u2014and they said no. That\u2019s an approval of closure and we\u2019re not going to stand by here and turn a document of evidence into something that we can\u2019t use.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e3cdc69f3c05800a7f99dc39ac5d782a\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that\u2019s a very interesting offering to the House, but, as the member will know from long standing, no one Minister is responsible for a Cabinet decision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002288715b334c79a24387d5c26e89a27d43\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: Why, when Marsden Point still has capacity to store hundreds of millions of litres of fuel, did he not use the existing tank farm to support a 70 million litre Government diesel reserve but instead chose to scrap Labour\u2019s fully funded strategic reserve of diesel?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022acd5d7da8d91e9a3c727d879bce14c2f\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: As night fell on the last Labour Government and as they fled from their Cabinet offices, there was a half-baked proposal\u2014unfunded, incomplete\u2014and in the interests of good constitutional Government, I couldn\u2019t take that forward in that incomplete state.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002248ce26e54d83406399b875df20400dec\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002271688fddcb7a3713d2fdc291c19649e1\u0022\u003EAndy Foster\u003C/span\u003E: What reports has the Minister seen regarding the transition of Marsden Point from a refinery to an import-only terminal, and what is the difference in storage capacity between the terminal we have at the moment and what Marsden Point would have delivered?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223cc0e80358f5e164b54ba2fd4b30cdf9\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: For the benefit of all the New Zealanders listening to this exchange: Marsden Point has approximately 700 million litres of storage. Sadly, most of it will require recommissioning as a consequence of the last Government approving the closure of Marsden Point. But I can confirm\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208f652cf829474cd3b52ee66e55cf7a8\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The fact that the Government of the day considered a report on the implications of Marsden Point being closed by its private sector owners does not mean the Government approved of it, and the continued assertion of that by a current Minister of the Crown is simply not true. Unlike a Government that does not consider the closure of McCain Foods or Wattie\u2019s or Winstone or all of those factories that are closing, our Government did consider the implications of those things. But lack of intervention to prop up a business that was closing anyway does not mean the Government approved of that business closing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f55bbd55f3bf9f46737831cd1c5b4bfa\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I think that\u2019s quite a reasonable proposition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228298f416e9f9cfa699ddc2f53d674e43\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: How can he claim there was no budget, no proposal for Labour\u2019s diesel reserve that had not only tens of millions of dollars available for funding it but also had a legislated change to make the levy available and a Cabinet decision to start work on procurement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002271d8acf3a6f0476999f9d03b4ae70e7d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220fcfbb3103c18ec6fa3866fa48472f0a\u0022\u003EHon SHANE JONES\u003C/span\u003E: I have taken the liberty of speaking to the CEO of Port Taranaki, one of the entities that was involved with what the Hon Megan Woods is referring to. Sadly, that CEO has confirmed to me that such a proposal could never work because of the regulatory unwillingness of the last Government to make it easier for such a thing to be developed, and the only reason that the member is talking about 70 million litres of storage is because she closed 700 million litres down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bed6e1df211ae4d44a4f8007efa53550\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Question No. 7, Rawiri\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] Well, I\u2019ll tell you what; I\u2019m not putting up with that sort of chipping from the sidelines. As soon as a question brings in a party\u2019s name and a party\u2019s actions, you get a political response. That\u2019s what that was, and I\u2019m not interfering with that. I didn\u2019t interfere with the question; I could well have stopped it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249e7f50ccfd44d7fc3e450c1ef2975ac\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, sir.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de432d08ba7c9c239114c4cc14458a09\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: It had better be a good point of order, because I\u2019m at the end of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d6090c07e47fb960e52f168ce01b3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aec155684c0858083327d142e4755fe5\u0022\u003EHon Kieran McAnulty\u003C/span\u003E: We weren\u2019t complaining about the political response. We know that if there is a question with a political bent to it, we should expect a political response. But what we do expect is Ministers\u2014when you have just agreed with the point of order made by Chris Hipkins that the assertion that the previous Government closed Marsden Point is incorrect, and he then turns around and ignores that and says it anyway, we are going to express concern about that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ef7a5394166c552818a1f02cbe88d8e\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I would invite you to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d9eef4e54a82679376cf1994bb8dcf88\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EPoint of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f7e41bfe9b6770b23b7da1b474497a35\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No. I\u2019d invite you to read the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E answer and you can come and discuss it with me if you want. The way I heard it was not quite the way you\u2019re putting it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00229e839f655bb596470bc4f5baed688532\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022719e54c088c77bd5d2bb53033566af72\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 7\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022 data-id=\u0022fd9797b7d604b9c181dd2f1548564435\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fd9797b7d604b9c181dd2f1548564435\u0022\u003ERAWIRI WAITITI (Co-Leader\u2014Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori) (14:31)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EPrime Minister\u003C/span\u003E: Does he stand by all his Government\u2019s statements and actions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022 data-id=\u00221cca6cb40979e49777589bda41d91b85\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221cca6cb40979e49777589bda41d91b85\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister) (14:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d55a2b5467a47d70c97cd5c00456bb4a\u0022\u003ERawiri Waititi\u003C/span\u003E: Why has he condemned Iran\u2019s response but refuses to condemn the United States and Israel for the illegal invasion of Iran, which killed over 1,500 people and injured 20,000 more?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e33e3898c0a48f535d8e231bc0f5402\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, we\u2019ve canvassed this over recent weeks. As I said, these are independent actions by the US and Israel, and it\u2019s up to them to explain the basis for their attacks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022611b47ce5d3b2a310dabb32f8c43bf97\u0022\u003ERawiri Waititi\u003C/span\u003E: Why has he refused to condemn the perpetrators of Operation Epic Fury when the Minister of Finance, Nicola Willis, stated clearly yesterday afternoon that \u201COperation Epic Fury and its resulting fallout is hurting Kiwis.\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226afc3b4c1ea390c7cafdc7a708a26704\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that is true. The conflict is hurting Kiwis with higher fuel prices.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0e2403c87194ab09a0bd954cda7ab12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022824777792967c231b5daca2dd9b3ffb6\u0022\u003ERawiri Waititi\u003C/span\u003E: Does he dispute the claims made by NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte when he indicated that New Zealand would be sending military support to the region; if so, will he categorically rule out sending any military support to this illegal bombing campaign that is killing Iranian civilians every day?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cd896dd87395460c8de853bbf60dbf66\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022df44b86ea271a0b6f28c879b4bf07731\u0022\u003ERt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON\u003C/span\u003E: We have not been asked or there have been no proposals put to us about any military engagement. We are very focused on actually responding to this conflict and the impact that it has on Kiwis. That\u2019s where our focus is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f9187ade9ea50180a1058bf8c3c88177\u0022\u003EEducation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d7efb9b5ef3bd5b541fe3751bda208c7\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 8\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022 data-id=\u002230b360abaa3a053a1f36619f27bbfd4b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002230b360abaa3a053a1f36619f27bbfd4b\u0022\u003EHon GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour) (14:32)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Education\u003C/span\u003E: How many times has she used Government resources to direct people to party political sites?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022 data-id=\u002272b918a81fc5aab6878f771556465f8d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002272b918a81fc5aab6878f771556465f8d\u0022\u003EHon ERICA STANFORD (Minister of Education) (14:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Yesterday, for the first time, I included in a sector email an embedded link to a ministerial video that I created especially for teachers. The ministerial video was mistakenly uploaded to the wrong site. When brought to my attention, it was resolved within about 15 minutes, and an email to the sector was sent this morning with the correct link to the same video.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022178a0e5b39379b967b2f4396b9ab06cf\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: Can she specify what the \u201Chuman error\u201D was: uploading the video to the National Party YouTube channel or sending out the email with a video link directing teachers to the National Party site?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022713993358ec0a92e97000101a69cd304\u0022\u003EHon ERICA STANFORD\u003C/span\u003E: Well, as I\u2019ve already said, there was a mistake in the uploading of the video to the wrong site. It was rectified within about 15 minutes of me being made aware of it. It was human error. Of course, I take responsibility for all of the things that happen in my office, as you would expect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022761513d35da6278b8ce94d9b85553efb\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: Did she authorise the email that was sent out in her name, and, if not, who did authorise and send the email out from her office?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d08cc14205f1e2f5171e720f5ca561e\u0022\u003EHon ERICA STANFORD\u003C/span\u003E: The email was sent out from my office and, as I\u2019ve already stated in the previous answer, I take responsibility for everything that happens in my office. This was genuinely a human error and it was rectified as soon as it was brought to my attention.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002256e7afbe855c9de95b6b5e107f387c69\u0022\u003EHon Nicola Willis\u003C/span\u003E: In her role engaging with parents whose children are in the education system, does she find their focus is more on who authorised an email in error, or on lifting the reading, writing, and maths achievement of their kids?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022143fc84f055ee7d385dcd81e5e329c32\u0022\u003EHon ERICA STANFORD\u003C/span\u003E: Parents and the sector are more interested in how we are reforming the education system with a clear, laser focus on raising achievement in reading, writing, and mathematics. The real question around this email was: what was it about? It was about the new Student Monitoring, Assessment and Reporting Tool, which is an assessment tool that, for the first time in this country, will be consistently used across the country to measure reading, writing, and maths over time so that we can raise achievement and close the equity gap.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220e7ddf59f679366af9e47b695609f272\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0b8fc8b124491673aac001ed456df94\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: Supplementary question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002223f4f46099b0a0aa274bcade25c5518c\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The Rt Hon Winston Peters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002233915ba0c422efcf5a69dcf6c7ba6afe\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: Oh!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002253d104d1efa186769d8cbff74bf0fb8d\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Can I ask\u2014you won\u2019t be disappointed. Can I ask, please, Minister, how does this temporary, brief oversight for a few minutes compare with the over $52 million bribe through the Public Interest Journalism Fund?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ac6cff12e261630592563599f5ace17\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, in so much as the Minister has some responsibility around this\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fc2462ded9c771942d4e006e97995ae1\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker. A member of the House cannot accuse anyone of bribery. It\u2019s a fairly big accusation to put in a question in the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221871be386c2b91c4b6dc44dc2fdbc47a\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m sorry, but I didn\u2019t\u2014once again, I\u2019ll say that I\u2019ve had proper speakers fitted here, I have hearing assistance, and I did not hear that word \u201Cbribery\u201D. If it was used\u2014can the member indicate if that word was used?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002220d040e2210938af9825f85583d17408\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: It was used, and I stand behind it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002258d22abef90991a097274b25cf383e27\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Right, that\u2019s OK\u2014good. Then we\u2019ll have the Hon Ginny Andersen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221eee191991284f59b9f8bb4ea78cbd10\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002284f27c2eb2139150a31fdcb14bde50df\u0022\u003ERt Hon Chris Hipkins\u003C/span\u003E: He has to withdraw that\u2014you can\u2019t let that stand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ff76d4226809a67b989c3dc2fe3b7ae\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, I think that is right. You do have to withdraw that comment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002286f8ba72a64ce7f22148c4ee4eaaedab\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Withdraw what? That they got paid $52 million when they signed up\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa26643b4cc708fc693c793dfdb8de19\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, don\u2019t do this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8a4a035dbd68c89e2fc9d9922a1468c\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014but only if they ran a certain narrative.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220b48eef535583b148ad689e54b6ac4b4\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Right\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022697c78a854629cb29b6dbcd0ac554c03\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: What do you call that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec86de07e3668faf9be15e11043ca491\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member has been here a reasonable period of time and he knows that it\u2019s not appropriate to accuse anyone in this House, either as an individual or a party or a former Government, of bribery. That is a long-held point here. I\u2019ve got the Clerk currently assisting me in getting the appropriate Speakers\u2019 ruling, and I would in the meantime suggest that the member simply withdraws it, or that he withdraws from the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bf910cb0c97a5b01f9165ed1f82afa32\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002288f1a844da7dfdbf34f3d087d6b6e399\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, no. What\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222420552bdfc9ccaf219e8bc0676b3544\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Would you ask the Clerk to follow what was said, because they immediately accepted that the word \u201Cbribe\u201D applied to them. I didn\u2019t say it was them, but they thought it was them, and therefore that\u2019s why they objected. Now, that\u2019s the difference that the Clerk of the House should be able to tell you about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221a548f040d8a8a26482abb62f2c15d7e\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, good. Well, I think that the member has got an instruction from the Speaker: he must make an unqualified withdrawal for a personal reflection\u2014Standing Order 121. Are we doing that or not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002269d011cd14c76c6b53e9a591e7d5fb89\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I apologise for having referred to a bribe\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e28b2f1f7ca19bc4da5b196bbe5319ba\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: OK.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b83462d15d0a0700e1c437707b841bc2\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221f2fc2c2fcbfac63583213d499b4d6a7\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, that\u2019s it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce50b1b767eaca5f285f16e8307e3565\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b4ecd86d19097181fe522f8669c76614\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, no, you can\u2019t qualify it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224351d8afab8ddcc1d2bf6cf041f60931\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and some members of the House think that it belongs to them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223c19683724ae0704549426cd3468d53c\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: It can\u2019t be qualified. I\u2019m sorry, Mr Peters. You either just, without qualification\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002239389daf00f2bb75ebbfdd58b94a67fb\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: All right, I apologise for the first part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022583425aa93df821df1128af1e77e399d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Good\u2014right\u2014and withdraw. Withdraw and apologise\u2014simple words. Mr Peters, withdraw and apologise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f920d072f9b752c606f4e8ff4138041c\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve withdrawn the second part, and I apologise for the first part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aa2ec9a565b5ad68b06c92feeeaa68f6\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Right. We\u2019re going to leave it at that. [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] We\u2019re leaving it at that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226ce8e350ca7ed2e0be54c97216b8c70b\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: When was she informed that an email sent out in her name with a National Party YouTube link embedded in it was sent out to all primary and intermediate school principals in New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ef047d4e5586aaa97569279d659bffae\u0022\u003EHon ERICA STANFORD\u003C/span\u003E: I was made aware of the error late last night, after 9 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c93ed1ce8455f70bf48bee8f413c72f6\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: When did she inform the Prime Minister that she had used Government resources to distribute a link to the National Party YouTube channel to all school principals? [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ba9a2afec94d7641c76c1896525d68f\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Good\u2014now, just a moment. Before I call the Minister, the House will be quiet and it will listen to the question in silence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e833dd61780e4015d4e52192700d7d7\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: When did she inform the Prime Minister that she had used Government resources to distribute a link to the National Party YouTube channel to all primary and intermediate school principals in New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225b04bd79e7ddebb3fd1be4b963c6f043\u0022\u003EHon ERICA STANFORD\u003C/span\u003E: When I was made aware of the issue last night after 9 p.m., I of course called the Prime Minister\u2019s office to explain what had happened and to make sure that we rectified it within a few minutes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dbab16630856f02e6f58ffeedec1e435\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: In the middle of a global fuel crisis, is it her habit to bother the Prime Minister with matters like the subject of this question?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220850c935d196a3e933b26c53c31f9bae\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, that would be a question in the nature of a personal interest; we\u2019re not taking that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8a1d1b1e6f1f548df0d33e0842539e9\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: Who removed the video from the National Party YouTube channel at around 10 p.m. last night? [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022894d52ea190ee023fc8d95b1b4d1f570\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, no. We\u2019re going to hear the question again because questions are heard in silence. When we are all silent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228a38fe709db8c4a1124162f56de9c919\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EAnother reshuffle.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225852ecbb3efb02efadc8bda138c0c01d\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I beg your pardon?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224b000305ee30b6ed21517ec3780b5c2f\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: Who removed the video from the National Party YouTube channel at around 10 p.m. last night?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228409c00e2d1a801e1c9c184ec03aa404\u0022\u003EHon ERICA STANFORD\u003C/span\u003E: I don\u2019t know the identity of the exact person that did it. I think the key thing, though, is that when we were made aware of it and we realised there was an error, we took it down, and, this morning, we put up exactly the same ministerial video on the correct channel, explaining to teachers that for the first time there is an amazing new smart assessment tool to be used twice yearly to measure student progress in reading, writing, and maths; the first time this country has seen a freely available nationally consistent tool required to be used so that we can raise achievement and close the equity gap.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223580e6655ee0086c1eecf6c8f42ab009\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, good, that\u2019ll do it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb28e625f3c321e2d8cf6006281259c2\u0022\u003EHon David Seymour\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister considered engaging a private detective to get to the bottom of this weighty matter\u2014who did it, who took it off the YouTube channel, and how do we make sure it never happens again?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226fed816224042b3fd4ebe15ddb0849f6\u0022\u003EHon ERICA STANFORD\u003C/span\u003E: While I understand that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229584c48389e55a6be9e9162b89f28944\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, in this case a yes or no would be satisfactory. We\u2019ll take it as a no. Sit down, and we\u2019ll have the Hon Ginny Andersen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022332da1789e56e80803493383d7eaedb2\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EHumiliating!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022630c4b4478eaf934b7dcb3bbe15e280f\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: When the House is quiet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7d3d2bba45eebe953ddf30b57e4467e\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: Is she concerned that there is a pattern of behaviour\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E] Can I start again?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221f1831ebe7ab2274be9b05595d1da75a\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m sorry, it\u2019s going to be a long afternoon because all questions are heard in silence.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec18849cb6adafe6834df7170e22a3f0\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: Is she concerned that there is a pattern of behaviour with her and her office regarding email distribution, that she herself has previously described as \u201Cuntidy and not best practice\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002298e1b3d1ca02f7119079766b7888d877\u0022\u003EHon ERICA STANFORD\u003C/span\u003E: I know that the member is very excited about her very first question as education spokesperson and would love a great conspiracy, but, unfortunately, there is not one here. I look forward to her next question about something that is relevant to achievement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d44fb9c399fa69f9ee9faca973fc54a9\u0022\u003EHon Chris Bishop\u003C/span\u003E: Who is better at managing emails: her or the former education spokesperson for the Labour Party? [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EInterruption\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022733f940ff7680130be82ecefc0ba4a8f\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s going to be the end of a number of supplementaries from the Government today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a1ece05505f5ae0a75b3686580746b61\u0022\u003EHealth\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002247afe880835da2a001e215217fdfd8c1\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 9\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022 data-id=\u0022f83983eb5aecf8218361f44ea0a12c3d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f83983eb5aecf8218361f44ea0a12c3d\u0022\u003EDr VANESSA WEENINK (National\u2014Banks Peninsula) (14:43)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Health\u003C/span\u003E: What recent progress has been made against the Government\u2019s health targets?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022 data-id=\u002295815fd6ed0e338afdf6ee6fd75091e8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002295815fd6ed0e338afdf6ee6fd75091e8\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN (Minister of Health) (14:43)\u003C/span\u003E: The latest quarterly results for October to December 2025 show encouraging improvements across all five Government health targets, with more New Zealanders accessing care faster. Despite a challenging quarter, Kiwis are spending less time in our emergency departments, there are shorter waits for elective surgeries and first specialist assessments, there is faster cancer treatment, and more children fully immunised by the age of 24 months. While these results are encouraging, we know there is still more work to do. You cannot manage what you don\u2019t measure and, through our health targets, we remain committed to driving improvements and ensuring wait times reduce for patients.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e02a0dac28d5273c7c27f14daec4900c\u0022\u003EDr Vanessa Weenink\u003C/span\u003E: What progress has been made in reducing wait times for elective surgeries and first surgical assessments?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022652d19fd1763839302e7beccb30f8c7b\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: We are seeing encouraging improvements across elective surgeries and first specialist assessments: 62.2 percent of patients are now receiving their first specialist assessment within four months, up from 60.6 percent the same time the year before; while 64.5 percent of patients are receiving their elective treatment within four months, up from 59.2 percent the same time the year before, showing clear improvements. Importantly, we have also delivered more care to more people, with 179,816 first specialist assessments carried out in this quarter, up by more than 11,000 compared to the same time the year before; and 51,513 elective treatments, up by more than 4,500 compared to the same time the year before. That means thousands more New Zealanders are being seen, treated, and supported to get back to work, back to their families, and back to living their lives.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e34a58a36e49bae8466a411703306089\u0022\u003EDr Vanessa Weenink\u003C/span\u003E: What improvements has he seen against the other health targets?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002276109ca9c1c74181a1e2734802d7f46f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2af290b902cb0e010b2d67852fd3050\u0022\u003EHon SIMEON BROWN\u003C/span\u003E: We have also seen strong gains across the other health targets. The target of faster cancer treatment has improved, with 87 percent of patients now receiving treatment within 31 days of a decision to treat, up from 85.9 percent the same time the year before. This means that patients are getting timely access to lifesaving care when it matters most. Childhood immunisation rates have also lifted to 82.9 percent, up from 77 percent the same time the year before. This represents more Kiwi children protected from preventable diseases, ensuring they are given a healthier start to life. The target of shorter stays in emergency departments has also seen an improvement, with 74.2\u00A0percent of patients being admitted, discharged, or transferred within six hours, up from 72.1 percent the time the year before.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022250edd936abdc730f27d7e3cf426c25b\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Question No. 11\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002288978fb9592a4911a8e47eae04d164f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002286668d161f269c8fc88973372beddd2c\u0022\u003EDr Vanessa Weenink\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve got a supplementary.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eee05099a1312198fcd7ca05aa5d4698\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I know you have, but it\u2019s Greg Fleming, question No. 11.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d9c93e144e0c6e03a0988abf983157c1\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: Question No. 10.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fd9a93858404062259ccb007589085fb\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Question No. 10? You\u2019re quite right, yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ed2e87e5fc2aafa04f67dc42d9e407b1\u0022\u003EChild Poverty Reduction\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ab91ae273638246be616f9959ae126ac\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 10\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u002266d404b86c847a8091eddd06330c387f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002266d404b86c847a8091eddd06330c387f\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (14:46)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister for Child Poverty Reduction\u003C/span\u003E: How many parents, if any, of the 169,300 children living in material hardship will receive the full $50 increase to the in-work tax credit?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022 data-id=\u0022e7c9958efa2e3c667ec5c0b07ba4c9f0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e7c9958efa2e3c667ec5c0b07ba4c9f0\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Child Poverty Reduction) (14:46)\u003C/span\u003E: The $50 increase to the in-work tax credit is targeted at low and middle income working families with dependent children. Inland Revenue estimates that around 143,000 working families with dependent children will get the extra $50 a week in full. We introduced this support package at pace to provide immediate support in a fast-moving situation. It is particularly focused on working households with children. According to the latest figures from Statistics New Zealand for 2024-2025, 48 percent of children in material hardship are in working households. This support we are providing is intended to be timely, temporary, and targeted at those most in need.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bcd0c589267f69f65cd4b10de629c63d\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: Why are more than half of the parents relying on income support, including some of our poorest, excluded from the relief announced yesterday?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220aa545f9b515261365dfda8cd0875a34\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: To quote from the Minister of Finance\u2019s press release from yesterday, \u201CThe policy is carefully targeted to families in the squeezed middle\u2014parents who are working hard for a living, are not eligible for main benefits, and yet have modest household incomes with which to support their children. We know these families will be hit particularly hard by the global fuel-price shock. We are delivering them timely relief.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002245eb75c5f3a60179d48368bc0745c123\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: Are families in poverty also squeezed, and, if so, why is she not really seeing any relief for them?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229c6b3476dee5c21e55092a3d3500b1a1\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: If the member had read the Minister of Finance\u2019s press release, he would have also seen that, on 1 April, beneficiaries do get a rise directly in line with the cost of living.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002266e19eabfb320a3429318ae982b21b4a\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: Is she aware that the legally and annually required $12 increase to jobseeker support, indexed to last year\u2019s inflation, is much less than $50 a week?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225aa87b170308c792d86967d7c218d400\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, it is $20, not $50.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f0b8006b31542d904bd64a78c4d72df9\u0022\u003ERicardo Men\u00E9ndez March\u003C/span\u003E: Is $12 extra enough to meet the additional costs of fuel and other living expenses, or does she expect people living in poverty to get further into debt simply to survive?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a1901a44e88e40d095f26c06ebac9721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227a9018e1bf9fdb2a767b56d79d96687b\u0022\u003EHon LOUISE UPSTON\u003C/span\u003E: Our Government is very clear about the fact that what is happening in the Middle East is having an impact on many New Zealanders, with the fuel price pressure that they are facing. We are also very clear that any response needs to be targeted, timely, and temporary, otherwise every single person in New Zealand would be affected by inflation going up again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002271dd41ff8d764a972409167a444f91d5\u0022\u003EEducation\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a635cef9c0f08629dd32d130b4d7f549\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 11\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227ef423fda7b143b890e93f8018529ebe\u0022 data-id=\u002219ac4f91259357f314fb3e23aa09a905\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227ef423fda7b143b890e93f8018529ebe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002219ac4f91259357f314fb3e23aa09a905\u0022\u003EGREG FLEMING (National\u2014Maungakiekie) (14:49)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Education\u003C/span\u003E: What changes has she announced to the Education Review Office\u2019s school reports?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022 data-id=\u0022da8c85d98adfb72dd6d70a9c710bfaff\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022da8c85d98adfb72dd6d70a9c710bfaff\u0022\u003EHon ERICA STANFORD (Minister of Education) (14:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Last week, I announced an overhaul of the Education Review Office\u2019s (ERO) school reports. From term 2 this year, parents will have access to clearer, more useful information about how their child\u2019s school is performing. For too long, ERO reports have been dense and complicated to read and understand, often failing to show how schools are doing and where improvement is needed. The new ERO reports will focus on student achievement, progress, and engagement, with clear measures, visual summaries, as well as more detail in the back end.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227ef423fda7b143b890e93f8018529ebe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232f5aa95db9c76940fb8b8484a3c1978\u0022\u003EGreg Fleming\u003C/span\u003E: Why has she made these changes?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220c43b494f7df5dbcd4ca3b5827be50c9\u0022\u003EHon ERICA STANFORD\u003C/span\u003E: If we are serious about a world-leading education system, then we need to be clear on how we get there. High-quality, clear reviews from ERO are a critical part of ensuring that all parts of our system are prepared to intervene, to respond, and to support our schools to excel. This helps the ministry to best direct resource and reduce the postcode lottery of school quality and performance. This is what parents care about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227ef423fda7b143b890e93f8018529ebe\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002295e3686040509476285a00ed3f951fb5\u0022\u003EGreg Fleming\u003C/span\u003E: What will be in the new reports?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002237b40d11275f4dba8e36c41507f8a1c5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bda626f49e1279eb4b733dfb60bf99a1\u0022\u003EHon ERICA STANFORD\u003C/span\u003E: The reports will provide a snapshot of school performance across 14 areas including literacy and numeracy, school achievement, attendance, equity, and provision for learners with additional needs. These are clear areas and categories that will give school communities clarity on what\u2019s working, celebrate success, and feedback on what needs improvement. Reports are focused on capturing the value schools add, recognising progress and improvements that learners are making, and not just a point-in-time judgment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00223bde24872e55bd2ad636594f16263fdf\u0022\u003EEconomic Growth\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ad4b5377efdf16b32699ba52a05226ea\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 12\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022 data-id=\u002294e8691ea3da8dd86790a48c14c89cde\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002294e8691ea3da8dd86790a48c14c89cde\u0022\u003EREUBEN DAVIDSON (Labour\u2014Christchurch East) (14:51)\u003C/span\u003E to the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister for Economic Growth\u003C/span\u003E: Do the 350 job losses at Heinz Wattie\u2019s and the closure of the McCain factory in Hastings contribute to economic growth; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022 data-id=\u0022ba6a112b75cb4d5db5ab2faa9f694c1b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ba6a112b75cb4d5db5ab2faa9f694c1b\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister for Economic Growth) (14:51)\u003C/span\u003E: Let me first acknowledge the member\u2019s new role. I also want to note that it is a very difficult time for anyone affected by these proposals\u2014workers, growers, and contractors alike\u2014and my thoughts are with those involved. Support is available from the Ministry of Social Development, including help with finding new employment and income support for those who are eligible. In terms of what it means for economic growth, changes at individual firms are part of much bigger movements in the economy that determine whether it is growing or not. It is worth remembering that 2.9 million New Zealanders are working in jobs across the country, and that this rose by 15,000 in the last quarter. While the last few years have been challenging for many manufacturers, the Performance of Manufacturing Index has shown the manufacturing sector, as a whole, expanding each month since the middle of last year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d809a931c38d1d4de97a35db00feef7\u0022\u003EReuben Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: How will the closures of Wattie\u2019s and McCain contribute to the growth of unemployment, which is already at a 10-year high of 5.4 percent?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226254395778522bf41dc8f9026384ba4f\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I\u2019m always concerned for those who become unemployed in these situations. However, what the member needs to understand is that the unemployment figure reflects both new jobs that are created and jobs that are lost, and it is the case, in any modern developed economy, that while some firms close, other firms open, and while some businesses reduce their workforce, other businesses expand their workforces. It is the overall balance of these factors that determines the unemployment rate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226066d830963bf0da187c7d737e8d4a6b\u0022\u003EReuben Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: How many of these hundreds of Kiwis who are losing their jobs does she expect to move to Australia?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002263fce34c2b56b0beffb35c7fa9a52895\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I haven\u2019t had any advice on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba5a40c52778f85c6ac20cc10a0503db\u0022\u003EReuben Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Is it acceptable that many Kiwis are facing job losses, rising unemployment, and increasing living costs, all while last year\u2019s annual GDP growth rate was just 0.2 percent?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225279e7614a34d2814d1f4a334adad09d\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: I think the member is confused; he\u2019s referring to a quarterly growth rate for the fourth quarter of the year. What the member needs to understand is that the very reason this Government is so galvanised in our efforts to grow the economy is because we recognise that that is where good-paying jobs come from, that is where rising incomes come from, and that is where the increased productivity that delivers a higher standard of living comes from. In order to be a country that delivers these things, we need to grow our economy, and that is what we are focused on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220625ff90b5fa4baa442fd625e4bdf84a\u0022\u003EReuben Davidson\u003C/span\u003E: Is it appropriate for her to continue to be the Minister for Economic Growth, considering she is not actually growing the economy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221161560b150b7cc6b262da171beb1577\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, yes, and I would refer the member to the Statistics New Zealand website\u2014it\u2019s easy to find on Google\u2014which shows that the economy grew in the last calendar year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cf9e1eb91ef740868a26db659355f7e9\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a5947506e0360ca9a48f06851badcd00\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Can I ask the Minister, when was the last time she heard someone measuring GDP growth on just three months\u2019 results?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226b99476d584f47b19420b8154e6947dc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c04dd279e0a3b038e761b95207b3f104\u0022\u003EHon NICOLA WILLIS\u003C/span\u003E: Well, he\u2019s new to the role; let\u2019s give him a break.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b07cc932ae94232bc771fafa3791e54\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: That concludes oral questions. We\u2019ll take a few minutes for those who need to leave the House to do so\u2014a few seconds, I should say.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00221a8dbb8dc3465f65ed0cfb040d5a5236\u0022\u003ESittings of the House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022bb330ebbd84f35eb9b9e892913fb8763\u0022\u003EExtended Sitting\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022 data-id=\u0022e3752fa93934dcbc8d83a922486e6e84\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b111696b9f040d3b1d5339eead7439f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e3752fa93934dcbc8d83a922486e6e84\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS BISHOP (Leader of the House) (14:55)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, That the sitting of the House today be extended into tomorrow morning for the continuation of the second reading of the Local Government (Auckland Council) (Transport Governance) Amendment Bill; the committee stages of the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2025-26, Compliance Simplification, and Remedial Measures) Bill; the committee stage of the Online Casino Gambling Bill and the Antisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Bill; the third reading of the Public Finance Amendment Bill; and the second reading of the Financial Markets Conduct Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the motion be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022097d890839367dab42e40831e0576d7d\u0022\u003EGovernment Business\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a2863a22b96ad9baceca892aa299b449\u0022\u003EDebate on Budget Policy Statement\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022277f038a8937dd04d4085b7c8c152506\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The House comes to the debate on the Budget Policy Statement 2026 and the committee\u2019s report on it. Can I, before I call that debate, remind members that it\u2019s not a wide-ranging debate. It\u2019s not a general debate. That\u2019s to be found in Speaker\u2019s ruling 141/2. It\u2019s based on the Budget Policy Statement and the committee\u2019s report on it. I repeat again: it is not a Budget debate, nor is it a general debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022 data-id=\u0022468700cfe834b4bf6c4a559d0f9ede8b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022468700cfe834b4bf6c4a559d0f9ede8b\u0022\u003ECAMERON BREWER (Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee) (14:57)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the House take note of the report of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the Budget Policy Statement 2026\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs chair of the Finance and Expenditure Committee (FEC), I\u2019m pleased to kick off this Budget Policy Statement (BPS) special debate as we look ahead to Budget 2026. The BPS was released on 16 December last year, alongside Treasury\u2019s 2025 Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update, which it draws on. As is required by the Public Finance Act 1989, the Minister of Finance must present a Budget Policy Statement, setting out the Government\u2019s fiscal strategy and its broad goals and policy objectives. The BPS released late last year, effectively, commences the Budget cycle.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe committee was very pleased to have both the Minister of Finance and the Secretary to the Treasury before us on these matters on 28 January. We also received a number of written submissions and heard from many submitters as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Government\u2019s overarching goals for its term in office are: to build a stronger, more productive economy that lifts real incomes and increases opportunities for New Zealanders; to deliver more efficient, effective, and responsive public services to all who need them and use them, and particularly to restore law and order and improve health outcomes and educational achievement; and to get the Government\u2019s books back in order and restore discipline to public spending.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGDP data has shown the economy growing 1.1 percent over the last half of 2026, but the conflict in the Middle East has now introduced a lot of uncertainty into economic and fiscal forecasts. The conflict is already having a negative impact on the New Zealand economy, most directly through the price of fuel, and we don\u2019t know how significant that will be and how long the disruption will last. One thing is for sure: this conflict has reinforced how important it is to have sounder books, at least, to deal with economic shocks and natural disasters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn Budget 2026, to be delivered on 28 May, the Government will focus on delivering a sustainable pipeline of infrastructure investments, addressing New Zealand\u2019s longer-term productivity challenges, keeping tight control of discretionary Government spending while funding a limited number of priority Government policy commitments, supporting the delivery of core public services such as healthcare, education, and law and order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis Budget Policy Statement makes it very clear that New Zealand is in a challenging fiscal position. The Crown\u2019s books have deteriorated since 2019 as expenses have risen faster than revenue. The increase in expenses as a percentage of GDP is due to a combination of factors this statement makes very clear: discretionary policy decisions, the impact of COVID-19 and weather events, the economic downturn, cost increases above those in the rest of the economy, demographic changes, and higher borrowing costs. New Zealand\u2019s operating deficit is now structural, so it will not resolve itself as this economy recovers. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFiscal consolidation is required to bring revenue and expenses back to balance and start reducing debt. Spending restraint over the medium term is key to realising this strategy, and spending restraint is realised by setting Budget operating and capital allowances. The operating allowance is the amount of net new operating funding in each Budget. The operating allowance for Budget 2026 has been set at $2.4 billion. Pre-commitments mean that there is only $1 billion per year left to be allocated from the operating allowance for Budget 2026, but now Budget 2026 has the Iranian conflict as a backdrop. Yesterday, we all saw the Government pre-commit up to $373 million of the Budget 2026 allowance to provide temporary, targeted, and timely support for nearly 150 working families. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220fe2d757f1306627d79e23de52bfb926\u0022\u003EDan Bidois\u003C/span\u003E: 150,000.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a5729f688e750275c1214a932d7c0602\u0022\u003ECAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: 150,000\u2014thank you, Mr Bidois\u2014working families. Health, education, defence, and law and order will be priority areas in the Budget, as I\u2019ve canvassed. And as the Minister of Finance confirmed in her appearance to the FEC, over half of the new money in Budget 2026 will go into health.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Government has a deliberate, medium-term approach to fiscal consolidation. The alternative approach to Government spending and debt would only further delay a return to surplus and see debt blow out completely. In fact, as the Hon Nicola Willis said at the release of this Budget Policy Statement back in December, \u201CWithout this disciplined approach, this year\u2019s deficit would be $25 billion and debt would be on track to blow out to 59 percent of GDP.\u201D Now is not the time to borrow and hope.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn contrast, over the last two Budgets, the Government has made cumulative ongoing savings of over $11 billion a year. One significant policy success in 2025 was Investment Boost, and we covered that off in this Budget Policy Statement report from FEC, page\u00A010, \u201CAnecdotally, the Minister told us that Investment Boost has allowed businesses to bring forward projects that might not have occurred otherwise. As an example, she pointed to an \u014Ctaki business that was going to expand its commercial kitchen because of the initiative.\u201D Of course, Investment Boost is where businesses conduct 20 percent of the new asset\u2019s value from that year\u2019s taxable income, on top of normal depreciation. It has been a significant policy success out of Budget 2025. Rest assured, there will be no splashing the cash in Budget 2026. While the Iranian conflict changes the 16 December 2026 Budget Policy Statement considerably, we as a country are in the strongest position we have been for several years for New Zealand to weather these events.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOn this side of the House, we are very proud of our finance Minister and the work, in particular, that she has done and the reassurance she has given New Zealanders in recent weeks that this Government is ahead of the game as far as dealing and managing all it can with the international conflict and the challenges it brings, particularly around fuel price escalation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESix years on, and as Treasury\u2019s Long-term Insights Briefing and the latest royal commission report confirmed, if you splash the cash in the name of kindness, it has hugely negative consequences for New Zealand and the cost of living\u2014and the cost of living. Mr Speaker, can I remind you what those two reports confirmed: $60 billion was borrowed and spent during COVID-19, and $30 billion of that was on non-direct COVID expenditure\u2014half of it not directly related to COVID, yet it was put out as part of the $60\u00A0billion COVID response and recovery package.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis Government\u2019s fiscal strategy is to keep a tight lid on new spending, find savings across Government, and keep debt under 50 percent of GDP, before bending back the debt curve downwards. Other parties, as we have heard, opposed all savings\u2014opposed all savings. They want to bring back expensive programmes and spend and borrow more.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222bd88928aab1251ad73700632b47875f\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, that\u2019s not\u2014yeah, just back to the report.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022920b8ce57f90acbfadaab94bf2f7c5eb\u0022\u003ECAMERON BREWER\u003C/span\u003E: But now is not the time. This Budget Policy Statement is the best evidence we have of how quickly things can change, and how careful and considered this Government needs to be, and will be, as we tread through this year and beyond.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMr Speaker, you need to know that there\u2019s only 64 sleeps until Budget 2026\u2014mark it on your calendar: 28 May. I commend the 2026 Budget Policy Statement to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u0022168353cb96a2d288ce05196be1ac4e55\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022168353cb96a2d288ce05196be1ac4e55\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (15:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Budget Policy Statements outline the goals and objectives of what will be in the forthcoming Budget. At our committee, we got to examine that, and it was a very telling objective, because, as well as outlining those goals and objectives of the upcoming Budget\u2014between those huge books of lines of numbers\u2014what we see is the values of a Government: what it is that a Government sees as its priorities and what it thinks needs to be prioritised. After all, that is what a Budget is: it is a Government laying bare where it decides to spend money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf we have a look at the context in which this Government is going to deliver this year\u2019s Budget, we had the Minister of Finance say that it would be a responsible Budget. Well, let\u2019s have a look at any marker that we would look at for that. We have GDP that is lower than it was two years ago, that will be a context for the delivery of this year\u2019s Budget; unemployment that is higher now than it was two years ago; business liquidations higher now than they were two years ago; the number of children in poverty higher now than it was two years ago; and our economic outlook from our credit agency Fitch downgraded under this Government. This is the context that this Budget Policy Statement needed to be examined in\u2014that we were examining a set of statements about what this Budget is going to contain, knowing that there are more people without work, there are more people finding it tough, there are more people who are losing their jobs, and we\u2019re being downgraded by our credit agencies. That is the context in which this will be delivered.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things that we know\u2014we hear every day from people\u2014is that the system is not working for them. Things are getting harder. National, before the 2023 election, went around telling everybody that things were going to get better, but, instead, they\u2019re finding they\u2019re getting worse. They\u2019re finding it harder to put food on their table. They\u2019re certainly finding it harder to fill the car with petrol. They\u2019re finding it hard to get by on a day-to-day basis, and this is not a Government that has a plan to help them. Certainly, the Budget Policy Statement laid that bare for everybody to see.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe had the chair of the Finance and Expenditure Committee say that the Minister of Finance came and said that this is not a Government that is going to operate on borrow and hope. Well, this is a finance Minister that has borrowed more than we did when we were in Government, and the only strategy that she seems to have is hope, and that has been no more evident than what we\u2019ve seen over the last three or four weeks as New Zealand has navigated a cost of living crisis. There does not seem to be a plan beyond hope\u2014a hope that things will resolve themselves.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d3be4623c60eea131a1eed396e53f63\u0022\u003ERyan Hamilton\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Sir, just regarding the Finance and Expenditure Committee\u2019s report on the Budget Policy Statement, I can\u2019t refer to the hope context that the previous Minister\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ded1e1da0b6426503fd72f629485346\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, you\u2019re quite right. I was just having a quick look at what the statement is, and I was about to pull the member back to that, and in terms of reflections on wider Government policy, it\u2019s not a wide debate and it\u2019s not a general debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002281232ba2db1d03495303e28a2cf4a52e\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Speaker, I was responding to a debating point raised by the chair of the Finance and Expenditure Committee in the first speech in this debate. I did not raise it for the first time in this debate; the chair of the Finance and Expenditure Committee did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ec72f9fb59e6d920b9e5b80ae27271ec\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I listened very intently to what the chair of the Finance and Expenditure Committee had to say, because of the instruction I\u2019d given to the House at the start of the debate. I think that while you may say that you were responding, you were responding extensively and I would suggest you come back to the debate in point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c28caf147524ce21a089f62f6e7ec233\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS\u003C/span\u003E: Absolutely. One of the things at the back of the select committee\u2019s report on the Budget Policy Statement is a list of the public submissions that we heard on the Budget Policy Statement. Not only does the select committee get to have time with the Minister of Finance and with Treasury officials, to interrogate the Budget Policy Statement; we also invite the public to submit on it. We received a wide range of submissions and these are summarised in this report.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think it is important in this debate that the views of a number of those submitters are made clear. If we have a look at some of the submissions we heard, there certainly were some key themes that came through. We heard from the Salvation Army, a particularly comprehensive submission about how they did not feel that the Budget Policy Statement that the Minister of Finance and the Government put out was going to do anything to fix the cost of living crisis that New Zealanders are facing. It certainly wasn\u2019t going to allow people who were struggling to make it better\u2014people for whom life was getting harder, not better, and they came and talked to us extensively about that. They wanted to see stronger and broader social investment alongside the fiscal strategy, which they felt was sorely lacking from the Budget Policy Statement as it was presented.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe also heard from the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia, who came along. We were told by the Minister of Finance in her Budget Policy Statement that health is going to be a priority. What we had is this group of medical professionals coming and telling us they had a workforce crisis. What they did not see in the Budget Policy Statement was anything to reassure them that this was going to be fixed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe also had the opportunity to ask the Minister of Finance what the plans were around the broader workforce of the health system. We asked the Minister of Finance when she appeared before the committee whether or not it was her plan to hire all the nurses that New Zealand was training, whether or not we were going to put into our health system those people that we were training, and she could not give us that reassurance. She could not say that as a country we would take on all our graduates, and instead what we\u2019d see are New Zealand trained graduate nurses getting on the plane with the tens of thousands of other young New Zealanders who are leaving the country because they do not see a future here. It is no wonder when our own Minister of Finance, before the select committee, cannot give that reassurance. We are in danger of becoming a training ground for Australia when it comes to our medical professionals, and we would like to have seen the Minister of Finance give that reassurance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOn this side of the House, we have a plan built on long-term investment, on shared prosperity, and on good jobs that keep our young people in New Zealand and don\u2019t send them fleeing for the nearest airport. We also heard from the Minister of Finance around productivity, and from the Treasury; productivity growth was something that we talked about at length at the Finance and Expenditure Committee. I think one of the things that is laid bare is the sole plan that National and the coalition Government have for increasing our productivity is Investment Boost. I think what people have to understand is that, over a 10-year period, this is 1 percent growth. This is something that we talked about at the Finance and Expenditure Committee. The Minister of Finance certainly came and, without having any data, shared her \u201Canecdata\u201D with us. When you actually drill down to what the Treasury projections were, it\u2019s 1 percent growth. That is what is meant to be feeding New Zealanders hope. It certainly isn\u2019t feeding wage growth, because we also heard about that. We will continue to see New Zealanders doing it tough and things getting harder for them and not better. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe then heard about what the growth prospects for the country were. Over the last few days\u2014well, actually, the last months\u2014we\u2019ve heard from Ministers and particularly from Shane Jones that it was Labour that allowed Marsden Point to close. Actually, first of all, it was that we did shut down Marsden Point; when it was pointed out that was a complete fabrication and he got pulled up on that, he shifted his language to say that we allowed it. Well, by Shane Jones\u2019 logic, Oji Fibre Solutions, Smithfield meatworks, Winstone Pulp, Carter Holt Harvey, Heinz Wattie\u2019s, and McCain Foods have all been allowed to be shut down by this Government. That is on this Government, using Jonesian logic. That is what he allowed to happen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe only difference is that in Government, when we saw something shutting down, as a Cabinet, we discussed it; we took a paper to Cabinet, and we said, \u201CWhat are the implications for New Zealand? We need to put a plan in place to respond to that.\u201D Have we seen this Government do that? No, we have not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e36a19c0ea6977a611f16ee8f93c1142\u0022\u003ERyan Hamilton\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order. Madam Speaker, I\u2019d just bring us back to the report from the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the Budget Policy Statement. The member is talking about things, and their Government\u2019s policies and positions, which are clearly beyond the scope\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002266c0686e71dfe868c69155096f66d985\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: That is the Speaker\u2019s call. Just let me get settled in my Chair so that I can catch up on the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224cded6d766b9fc76b69a3c698fdb314c\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. This is exactly what we discussed in the Budget Policy Statement: unemployment and what the plan was to fix it. The difference between their Government and ours is that when we saw something happening, we discussed it as a Cabinet. But what have we heard from this Government? Crickets. Nicola Willis tells people it\u2019s bad luck, basically, if they lose their job\u2014\u201COh, well.\u201D There is no plan. For us, it is imperative that we do have a long-term plan, we do invest in our future, and we set up a reason for our young people to stay\u2014not something we have seen from this Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022 data-id=\u00227063ce8f3cb1468566cd17058ea18370\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227063ce8f3cb1468566cd17058ea18370\u0022\u003EFRANCISCO HERNANDEZ (Green) (15:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise to oppose the Budget Policy Statement. This Budget Policy Statement was hopelessly out of date and out of touch even just four months ago, when it was issued. It\u2019s painfully obvious now, in today\u2019s context, that it reflects a fundamentally out-of-touch Government that is completely all at sea on how to build a modern, productive, resilient economy, despite the words in the Budget Policy Statement aiming to that effect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENo Government is as ill-prepared to tackle the crisis that we are facing today, and the Budget Policy Statement will serve as an autopsy of just how badly this Government has failed to prepare us for this crisis. In the short term, they\u2019ve failed to prepare us, with our Minister of Foreign Affairs naively reflecting that the war will end much more quickly than people are thinking. He said that a fortnight ago, and the terrible war shows no sign of abating any time soon. This naivety has meant that the Government has wasted crucial time. Rather than taking the crisis seriously, they have failed to prepare New Zealand in a meaningful way. With their meagre package of support being funded\u2014$373 million\u2014out of the operating allowance\u2014that\u2019s the link to the Budget Policy Statement, Mr Hamilton\u2014with their meagre package of support reaching only a fraction of families and missing out some of our more vulnerable communities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYears from now, when the inevitable royal commission of inquiry comes to exhume the corpse of this Government and the corpse of this Government\u2019s failed response to this crisis, I bet it will show that this Government missed the boat and spent a few critical days dithering, thanks to this Trump-loving, MAGA hat - wearing, Aotearoa-hating, New Zealand First, ACT, and National coalition. Their short-term failure to adequately prepare New Zealand would, perhaps be more forgivable if they had spent the last few years making Aotearoa a more resilient and independent place. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EUnfortunately, their record of failure is reflected in the Budget Policy Statement. The Budget Policy Statement does not mention the word \u201Cresilience\u201D or the phrase \u201Cclimate change\u201D even once. Instead, it sets out, as its goal, narrow financial metrics which reflects this Government\u2019s ultra-constrained fiscal strategy, and they would admit to that; they palter that as their point of pride. These three points are: to reduce Crown core expense towards 30 percent of the GDP, return headline operating balance measures back to these surpluses, and the 40 percent target for net Crown debt.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis Government, like the French generals of World War II, are fighting the last war. They\u2019ve learnt the wrong lessons from the COVID crisis, and their narrow focus on preventing core Crown debt from increasing means, that, in practical terms, it is actually everyday New Zealanders and the poorest New Zealanders that are bearing the economic pain for this crisis. The absence of any measures that they\u2019ve proposed, as either short-term intentions or long-term objectives that would increase New Zealand\u2019s resilience, is deeply indicative of how unprepared they have left our country to deal with this crisis.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe know that this New Zealand First - ACT - National coalition have fundamentally sabotaged every effort that would have broken Aotearoa New Zealand\u2019s dependence on fossil fuels\u2014that\u2019s discussed on page 6 of 10 of the transcript. In energy, they cut the Regional Energy Transition Accelerator, they scrapped the energy-efficiency rebates, they scrapped the ban on new fossil fuel baseload generation, they scrapped the Government Investment in Decarbonising Industry funding, they removed the renewable energy target, they cut funding for the Warmer Kiwi Homes scheme. In transport, they cut the Clean Car Discount, they scrapped the sustainable biofuels obligation, they cut all the programmes that would have provided vehicle kilometres travelled by passenger cars to providing alternatives, and they cut passenger transport subsidies and made public transport much more expensive for everyday New Zealanders. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe impact has been\u2014well, we\u2019ve seen the catastrophic effects that their Budget Policy Statement will further submit\u2014that electric vehicle sales have crashed from over a quarter of sales in 2023, to less than 10 percent in 2025. We are far behind the world: in Australia, one in five cars sold are electric; in China, one in two new cars sold are electric. The global average is one in four new cars sold are electric, but, unfortunately, Aotearoa is lagging far, far behind due to the policy decisions that this Government has made and confirmed in this Budget Policy Statement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBy 2030, we could have saved 1.3 billion litres of petrol just from the Clean Car Discount and the feebate discounts alone. In real-world terms, it means that the prices are rising faster than they would have otherwise because there are more petrol and diesel vehicles on the road than there would otherwise have been if this Government hadn\u2019t come in and slashed and burnt all of the climate resilience measures the previous Government had introduced. I mentioned all these things, because there is nothing in the Budget Policy Statement that mentions or reverses cuts to these programmes. I mention this because we source most of our fossil fuels from overseas, and the Government removing measures that would have enabled New Zealand to generate our own renewable energy is another step that locks us into dependence on fossil fuel sources that are always vulnerable to fuel shocks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet me be clear: fossil fuels, whether it\u2019s here or overseas, will always lock us into dependence to the global price of overseas fluctuation of the oil markets. Even net oil-producing countries, like the US, are suffering from the oil shock because the price of fossil fuels is determined by the overseas market. Now, we can see this analogy in the fact that even though Aotearoa grows enough food to feed 50 million people, the price of food has still skyrocketed and continues to skyrocket here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf the Budget Policy Statement that locks us in has been a disaster for our resilience and our climate response, it has also been, likewise, a disaster for our economy. I quote from the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update: \u201COverall activity has fallen more quickly than it did following the global financial crisis in the late 2000s. Per capita GDP fell 5 percent from its peak in 2022, compared with a fall of 3.9 percent over the 2008 to 2009 period.\u201D Unemployment is reaching the levels of the great financial crisis. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI remind the House that these projections were generated even before the Iran war started. The economic conditions have changed so much since this Budget Policy Statement was drafted that we recommend that the Government tear it up and start all over again. We would recommend that, but we know that they would produce exactly the same documents as they do now, because this document, and this Government\u2019s wider philosophy, is emblematic of this Government\u2019s response to the crisis. It is a Budget Policy Statement of cuts, it is a Budget Policy Statement of austerity masquerading as discipline, and it is a Budget Policy Statement of failure. Nothing makes this more clear\u2014that this Government has learnt nothing and forgotten nothing\u2014than in their so-called response to this fuel crisis, which they funded, partly, out of the operating allowance of $1 billion that this Budget policy document refers to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe meagre amount that the Government is offering, only to a few households in New Zealand, is a drop in a bucket of what it takes to fully address this crisis. Let me be clear: putting a financial package of assistance to 150,000 families out of 1.78 million households in New Zealand\u2014where not even every one of those 150,000 is getting $50 a week\u2014is not enough. Beneficiaries, students, and many working people who do not fit these narrow criteria have been left out. There have been zero attempts in this package to ensure that incentives that actually reduce for fuel conservation and decrease the cost of living, are aligned or even if they reach a broad amount of people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat\u2019s worse is: who pays for this targeted relief? This Government has chosen not to impose a windfall profit tax and, instead, has stated outright that the Government will pay for it through taking from the operating allowance. What this means is that the Public Service, which has already had its capacity eroded through cuts and that they\u2019ve seen doctors cleaning beds and doing admin work, will get even more and more gutted. The $1 billion operating allowance is not even enough to keep up with inflation, and it\u2019s been eroded with this Government\u2019s meagre measures to deal with the COVID crisis; meanwhile, the same corporations and big elites that price gouged ordinary people will have free rein to make the same mega-profits that they did during COVID.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf the Greens were in Government, this Budget Policy Statement would deliver real relief for real people who need it the most, a payment to adults who are below the median income, and free universal public transport because Aotearoa deserves it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002272cd5f617a1229af2ed9c592ae688bc9\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The member\u2019s time has expired.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022 data-id=\u0022257bd83bd06482dfb9925c9b01189cc0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022257bd83bd06482dfb9925c9b01189cc0\u0022\u003EHon DAVID SEYMOUR (Deputy Prime Minister) (15:28)\u003C/span\u003E: When that guy got up, I thought, \u201CI wonder why the Green Party don\u2019t let him give more speeches.\u201D; now we all know!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to bring the debate back, away from the sound bites and slogans, towards this document that we\u2019re debating: the Budget Policy Statement and the Finance and Expenditure Committee\u2019s report on it. There\u2019s a lot of numbers in here that may be out of date, given the changes in the last few weeks, but I think it\u2019s important, as a starting point, that people actually know what the Government\u2019s doing and what it\u2019s spending. If you go through it, there\u2019s a table here that says that in 2018-19, the Government was spending $87 billion\u2014the core Crown expenses. And you say, \u201CWhat is $87 billion?\u201D Well, if you divide it by the number of people, it\u2019s around about $17,000 for each person in this country. You think of a family of four, well, that gives you about $68,000 being spent by the Government on their behalf. I just want to start with that because that\u2019s where we were in 2018-19. Since then, the amount being spent has gone up to $142 billion. That means we\u2019re now spending, per person, about $28,000\u2014$17,000 a person six or seven years ago, up to $28,000 a person now. If you take a family of four, well, that\u2019s actually\u2014help me here\u2014about $112,000 of Government spending on that family.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to start with those basic facts, because when you get the people over on the other side and there\u2019s all this, \u201COh, it\u2019s all slash and burn\u201D\u2014it\u2019s like a high school debating club; \u201CThey\u2019re the capitalists, and we are the caring people\u201D\u2014just come back to the fact that, under this Government, the Government is spending $141 billion. That is something like $112,000 on a family of four. Of course, it averages out\u2014it\u2019s not the same for everyone\u2014but I make the point that when people get up and say they want to spend more taxpayer money on something, well, first of all, we\u2019re already spending a lot, and throwing money at every problem hasn\u2019t worked.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn fact, you can see the amount that expenditure has increased in the last six years. New Zealand superannuation has gone up $8.6 billion. Welfare benefits have gone up $8\u00A0billion. Health has gone up $12 billion in the last six years. These are really big increases in the amount that is being spent, but one of the most interesting amounts is the amount that\u2019s gone up in the finance cost. We\u2019re now spending on interest about $10\u00A0billion a year. That, again, if you take it down to an individual person, is about $2,000 a person just on the Government\u2019s interest on its debt. And you think, \u201CWow.\u201D Go back to a family of four: that family of four has got about an eight grand interest bill that the Government is paying, interest on debt that we\u2019ve taken out for every four people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, why is there so much interest on the debt? Because there\u2019s an awful lot of debt. The net core Crown debt sits at $182 billion. When the Labour Government got in, it was about $60 billion. We\u2019re still in deficit\u2014it has grown a bit under our Government\u2014but they, basically, borrowed $100 billion in six years. Again, I just want to say to people who say, \u201CWell, if only the Government spent more money\u201D\u2014we get these guys who say, \u201CWe\u2019re more generous. We would spend more.\u201D\u2014the fact is that, actually, they borrowed an extra $100 billion. They said, \u201COh, we had COVID.\u201D Sure; we can debate whether that was well managed, but the issue is this: we hear the Public Service is run down. They started with 47,000 in the Civil Service; they finished with 65,000. They hired another 18,000 people. They increased the amount they spend by about $60 billion a year. They increased the amount of debt they have by about $100 billion. They added about 20 grand of debt per family.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou sort of say, \u201CGee, surely throwing more money at the problem can\u2019t be the solution?\u201D, because, if spending more taxpayer money was the solution, wow, these guys would have fixed health, they would have fixed education\u2014they would have fixed everything. The infrastructure would be perfect. There would be no potholes in the roads. The truth is that they spent all that money and they just didn\u2019t get the results, and some of the evidence of what they spent and how expenditure has increased in the last few years is contained in this document. I think it\u2019s important to get those kinds of facts and figures out there. The question is: what are we going to do about it?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOur challenge is to make sure that we get better value for money from every single dollar, and where we start is that we give ourselves an operating allowance. That\u2019s in this statement, and it says we\u2019re only going to increase spending by $2.4 billion of new money. Now, that\u2019s interesting, too. There\u2019s a figure in here\u2014I think it\u2019s Figure 4\u2014about the operating allowances over the years. In 2022, after COVID was largely done, they had a $5 billion operating allowance. They did lots of big ones like that, lots in the threes and fours, lots of really big increases in spending. That\u2019s why we\u2019re now in this position. We\u2019re committing to an operating allowance of only $2.4 billion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen you consider the population is growing, and inflation is still going to some extent, it means that we have to drive efficiency. That\u2019s why we do things like setting targets. We set targets for the number of people that get immunised against MMR, because that really matters. We set targets for the number of children that are actually regularly attending school, because I would say that that matters more than just about anything. We set targets for the amount of violence, and the Government publishes the results on its website, and just about all of them at this point are going in the right direction. We\u2019ve got less violent crime: 49,000 less in violent crime. We\u2019ve got more students attending school. Every school term we\u2019ve been in Government, we\u2019ve actually got better results. By setting targets and measuring the results, instead of throwing money at the problem, we\u2019re actually getting better.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019re also making sure, by keeping that operating allowance at $2.4 billion, that the rest of the economy has time to catch up with the Government. That\u2019s why this forecast says that the percentage of the economy that\u2019s going to be spent by the Government\u2014well, it started out at 34 or 35 percent when we came in; it was 32.5 percent last year; 32.8 percent forecast this year; and it\u2019s forecast to get down to 30 percent by the end of the decade. We\u2019re actually making sure the Government takes a smaller portion, a smaller share of the economy, and we\u2019re making sure that we get the results in health and education and safe streets and things that make a difference. I think that really is the contrast and the choice that New Zealanders have.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, they can make great videos for TikTok. I\u2019m not going to try to compete with them there, but the question is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bc1648b3077e8ca3b0e73193ca3aa0ff\u0022\u003EFrancisco Hernandez\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019re not even on TikTok?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226e1ef2baa19e4b8b9dc9ee8604ae7dba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b4c3b95bcf51b197244acc66760b4c1\u0022\u003EHon DAVID SEYMOUR\u003C/span\u003E: He says I\u2019m not even on TikTok. I am, and I\u2019m sorry that you haven\u2019t found my account yet! I\u2019ll put some economics up there, and maybe some advice for public speaking. You might learn something, buddy. It would help you a lot. The fact is that we need to have more than sound bites and slogans and TikTok accounts, or whatever he thinks he\u2019s on. I think he\u2019s probably on a few things, actually!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we need to do is ensure that we get responsible government, and that is: crunch down the amount we spend, free up cash for Kiwi households to spend on their own needs, because they\u2019ll spend it better than we will\u2014I can guarantee, no matter which side of the House is in power, people spend their own money better than any politician\u2014and make sure that when people do need the support of quality public services, we are improving the quality of the services they receive. It\u2019s only then, with that sort of management, that people can have a place worth staying, a place where they feel the situation is stable, that their efforts will make a difference, and that they can build a life in this great country and they\u2019re not worried about what\u2019s going to happen if the other side gets in and just runs away with the company credit card again and racks up a whole lot of debt that they\u2019ll be left paying off for a very long time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESpeaking as the leader of the ACT Party, I\u2019m immensely proud of the savings and the improvements that we\u2019ve managed to drive: Karen Chhour, in youth crime; the attendance that I\u2019ve been responsible for; the improvements in medicine funding; but also the savings that we\u2019ve been able to drive. We estimate that if you gave your party vote to ACT in the last election, you actually saved $57,000 for the taxpayer. If you take the number of votes we got and you divide that by the amount that ACT Ministers can point to saving, there\u2019s no other party that can say, \u201CIf you give us your party vote, we\u2019ll save the taxpayer 57 grand.\u201D It\u2019s got to be a good deal, and it\u2019s free to vote. It\u2019s the sale of the century, actually! That is the kind of diligence and care for the taxpayer and their money and their hard work and their time that the ACT Party brings to this House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI commend the committee for its report. I commend our Minister of Finance for the Budget Policy Statement. We\u2019ve got a lot more work to do, rolling up our sleeves as we go through some tough times with this energy situation and conflict in the Middle East. Thank you, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022 data-id=\u0022f81619d0efea1baf2113cfd9570910d4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f81619d0efea1baf2113cfd9570910d4\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON (NZ First) (15:39)\u003C/span\u003E: I rise on behalf of New Zealand First and as a member of the Finance and Expenditure Committee. I commend this bill to the House, and I also commend\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002207bb9c463489cf4a13d8acc70dca0916\u0022\u003EDan Bidois\u003C/span\u003E: Budget Policy Statement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264c0cd5704f9706cd73d200aad72d72d\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014sorry, our Budget Policy Statement\u2014our chair for the excellent speech he gave. And thank you to the leader of the ACT Party for a number of measures in there and a number of indicators that have pointed us in the right direction. This lays the ground for me. Thank you very much.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Budget Policy Statement in December 2025: slow and steady, getting the fundamentals right, getting things back in order, not flirting with modern monetary theory\u2014actually, theory is sometimes replaced by \u201Cfairy\u201D\u2014like the previous Labour Government\u2019s long, large-scale asset purchasing programme, COVID spending, half of which was helicopter money creating inflation, debt, and asset hikes, with real house prices having left the room.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDecember 2025: a long way to go, recovering from the economic disaster of the previous Government but with some life signs emerging at that point. Let me remind you: employment was increasing, business confidence was improving, inflation had halved, the official cash rate had halved, mortgage rates nearly halved\u2014mainly because the banks have to make a bit of profit along the way, whether the things are going good or getting bad, but that\u2019s something we can live with so far\u2014return to operating surplus by 2028/29, and, that wonderful policy, Investment Boost, which was already gaining traction. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo there were some life signs there. That was then; this is now. What a difference a quarter makes; a new old war. There\u2019s a quote from the Guardians of New Zealand Superannuation: never seen a bubble burst when the world is talking about a bubble; they generally come when no one is expecting it. That\u2019s what\u2019s happened here. Immediate effects: energy crisis, longer-term challenges. The Strait of Hormuz carries a multiplicity of trade categories, not just oil. We need to be prepared. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELuckily, this Government has a diversity of expertise, and it watches and listens before it acts. Fancy that; shore up and shorten supply chains\u2014Singapore, South Korea, Japan\u2014manage relief while addressing inflation, still addressing inflation, family tax credit from within our already extremely tight operating budget. Look to alternative fuels and buddy up with Australia. That\u2019s a great start, don\u2019t you think?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229dec15080250cfe8bc8b503a6ad5899e\u0022\u003EDebbie Ngarewa-Packer\u003C/span\u003E: No, not if it\u2019s dirty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1e2c651bf036cdc28e9b449bfdf09c8\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: I didn\u2019t think you would. Where to from here, and what can the public expect from us? Well, we on the Government side are, broadly, a centre-right coalition of the three; you\u2019ve got our friends, the libertarian neoliberals down the end there; got our friends in the middle here who are the steady and straight company\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022440a125e85954bae9f5d470b7551e4f3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b82a964388b62391db2fb31c8f50e6a7\u0022\u003ECameron Luxton\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019ve got to love the self-description; let\u2019s hear it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222eb2e827014b9303a7c4fb15f9316042\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014yeah, well, you can come back later\u2014and then you\u2019ve got us, the nationalist economists, economic growth from building from the bottom. We\u2019re not the same, but we know how to implement in a coalition agreement. No one can deny that; we always win that competition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMany of my friends and colleagues have asked me, \u201CWhy did you join New Zealand First?\u201D Regional development: yes, we get that, but it\u2019s bigger than that. Many will know that I\u2019m a fan of\u2014and I hope you can look up the meaning of this\u2014endogenous economic development. Go look it up if you don\u2019t understand what it is. New Zealand First is a nation-building party, building on our own resources, our own assets, our own wealth, our own businesses, our own globally competitive advantages, and our own people, to make us great again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOn the nation-building theme, part of that is building resilience and security into our economy. We\u2019ve been working hard on those things for many years, which is why we have reacted so vociferously on the closure of Marsden Point, and the member across the aisle opened this argument and, therefore, I will respond. When I first arrived in Northland to head up the regional development agency, the first thing I noticed was the strength and depth of their secondary industry. The second thing I noticed was Northlanders\u2019 extreme resilience and can-do attitude. They may have had a verbal stoush now and again, but then they got on with it and got things done. I like that. I think that may be why they reserve judgment on the Aucklander that just arrived\u2014the newcomer\u2014when I said, no, I\u2019m not writing another strategy; we\u2019re forming an action plan with projects on it and we\u2019re going to implement them, and we did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMarsden Point: let me give you a few clues, on the other side of the House\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229a59e45569ba04d73014c21904250dd0\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Wilson, as it relates to the Budget policy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c117f6511bc4b8fb6fdcf9c6133fb99\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022386e7c8ead1f5c9c8c537aa2ec01c87b\u0022\u003EDr DAVID WILSON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, it relates to the energy crisis, Madam Speaker, thank you. The closure of Marsden Point was a heavy hit for Northland. Built between 1961 and 1964, it created huge employment opportunities then and in the 60-odd years that followed. Many companies owe their genesis and their growth to the refinery. It accounted for between 7 and 10 percent of GDP in Northland when I was there, with around 1,100 jobs dependent directly on the refinery, and another 2,400 in supplier services and contractors. It supplied 70 percent of New Zealand\u2019s fuel supply and 40\u00A0percent of New Zealand\u2019s total energy supply.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt survived and supported New Zealand through the energy crisis of the 1970s when interest rates went far beyond 20 percent and inflation was rampant. It survived through many business cycles, extreme fluctuations in oil prices. It is one of the most efficient small refineries in the world. Good, hard-working, skilled people, and along comes project Te Mahi Hou. I wonder if you can remember that or have even heard of it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFast forward 50 years to 2015 and 2016, Te Mahi Hou project, circa $365 million to upgrade the refinery. Part of that upgrade was a new continuous catalytic converter delivering increased efficiency, increased production, and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Local company Culham Engineering headed a consortium of local suppliers including McKay electrical, Rudolphs engineering, United Civil, beating out international competitors for that contract to finish on budget and before time. That\u2019s right: Northlanders delivering for themselves, employing 440 people during that construction. That was only seven years ago, and the closure was devastating for Northland, not least of which was the 300-odd highly skilled workers that left our shores and hit a myriad of contractors and suppliers at that time. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ve heard recently that sweet crude produced in Taranaki was not able to be used at Marsden Point. At the time of that project, I heard one wag say, \u201CLook, we take Indonesian mud and turn it into jet fuel.\u201D Do you seriously think that the expertise in Northland would not be able to rejig the converter in times of crisis like these? Not seven years after the upgrade, Labour has been complicit in what I would call \u201Ceconomic vandalism\u201D. Let me channel one of the leaders of the Labour Party\u2014the Hon David Lange, in one of his finest moments\u2014I can taste the sulphurous sanctimony in your breath. Thank you, Madam Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022 data-id=\u0022e70aecca6e7a157f3fd184a96b69d26c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224eeb694c55ab4633a7c9a1c69024072a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e70aecca6e7a157f3fd184a96b69d26c\u0022\u003EDEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER (Co-Leader\u2014Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori) (15:48)\u003C/span\u003E: T\u0113n\u0101 koe e te P\u012Bka. Thank you. First of all, I\u2019d like to stand on behalf of Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori not to commend this, the Budget Policy Statement (BPS) 2026, to the House. It\u2019s not a committee that I\u2019m on, but it\u2019s been really interesting listening to the various sides of debate and understanding the complexity of the figures and what it is that we have before us as a nation, and notwithstanding the challenges of fiscal discipline. What we are here talking about to our people is the decisions that have been made on how they get to live their lives every day.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I\u2019d like to give it a little bit of personality and heart because, I think, at the end of the day, what we are discussing here are the goals that the Government has decided\u2014and there are three: economic productivity, public services, and fiscal discipline\u2014are going to help improve ordinary New Zealanders\u2019 families out there struggling and working really hard lives. What we have seen is that for the struggling families, there is actually no relief coming from the focus, certainly on this BPS. What we see is that there is no cost of living relief signalled, that there is going to be no new transfers of income support flagged. That\u2019s problematic for a whole lot of New Zealanders because what we have experienced in the last year and this promise of when the world gets better and productivity increases, it\u2019s going to trickle down, and your income is going to improve.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn fact, what we\u2019ve survived in the last couple of years with this Government is $21\u00A0billion worth of cuts; 116 programmes cancelled; about, I think, nearly half of\u2014what?\u2014$12.8 billion ripped from the pay equity system. We\u2019ve seen wages for women, nurses, teachers, and carers all under attack; we\u2019ve seen lunches cut for tamariki; we\u2019ve seen $32.5 million for M\u0101ori housing supply cut; we\u2019ve seen M\u0101ori health inequities cut; we\u2019ve seen landlords given $2.9 billion; we\u2019ve been seeing a whole lot of axes and cuts across nurses and the standard of care inside the health system; and we\u2019ve seen 90-day trials come back. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ll go back to what that means for people on the ground. It\u2019s silent for those who have been left behind and who have been really tolerant and patient, being told \u201CWork, work, work, work, and it\u2019s going to get better.\u201D There\u2019s nothing in here that we\u2019re seeing that\u2019s going to get better. In fact, what we\u2019re seeing also is that the BPS ignores the whole energy security system or lack of energy security that we have. We heard that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019re in a crisis. We\u2019ve been in a cost of living crisis. We\u2019re now in a fuel crisis. We\u2019re in a wh\u0101nau resilience crisis. There\u2019s nothing that\u2019s happening here to show for all our discipline, all the cuts we\u2019ve endured from this Government, that it\u2019s going to get better for anyone else. Certainly, yesterday\u2019s relief package showed that. What we\u2019ve seen is millions have been left out\u2014millions of ordinary New Zealanders who are students, who are superannuitants, who are workers, who are in between jobs, who are on benefits. It\u2019s not that they\u2019re lazy but the mere fact that they\u2019ve been made redundant or are unwell. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we needed to see is that the Government was going to give some inspiration, some kaha to the rest of Aotearoa to say that it\u2019s going to get better\u2014it\u2019s going to get better\u2014but we haven\u2019t. We could have seen a renewable energy input into this resilience to say that, actually, if we invest in solar roofs at scale, we could at least relieve some of you, but there has been absolutely nothing. It\u2019s asking us to live the same way, this living of austerity that has been forced on the whole of Aotearoa.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s easy, because behind every one of these decisions are families who are going hungry. We\u2019ve got now, I think, 640,000 living on the poverty line. We\u2019ve got women who have been asked to hold back on their whole equity claim. We\u2019ve got kaum\u0101tua rationing their dialysis because they can\u2019t afford to go. We\u2019ve got first-home buyers whose KiwiSavers have been raided. We\u2019ve got communities who have been told to give up your reo, your culture, housing programmes, health authority, and the Government is calling this responsible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhere is your heart for your people, your people that stand up during COVID, during the climate crisis, during and including the fuel crisis? How long are you going to expect us to continue to say, \u201CCarry on. It\u2019s going to get better.\u201D? It\u2019s going to get better when you\u2019re making decisions that are actually looking after\u2014and they\u2019re political choices. You\u2019re politically choosing poverty and hardship for people to live with. That\u2019s what this BPS shows. It\u2019s really clear what this Budget is: again, we\u2019re going to have another year of looking after the wealthy, and it takes from those who have the least. That\u2019s unacceptable. It\u2019s hard out there, and I suggest some of you get out of this House and see how real people are living on the ground.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022 data-id=\u0022d3aeea5feb4190a3b5e06db7ca00cfde\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002298c1995a3396432382c4b04f94f6462f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d3aeea5feb4190a3b5e06db7ca00cfde\u0022\u003ERICARDO MEN\u00C9NDEZ MARCH (Green) (15:53)\u003C/span\u003E: There is one funny myth that the Government members want us to believe when they speak about this document, the Budget Policy Statement, and that is that there is not enough\u2014that there is not enough to ensure that no one goes hungry; there\u2019s not enough to guarantee everyone a warm, safe home to live in; that there is not enough to ensure that we can guarantee a job to everyone who exits training and goes into the workplace; that there is not enough to guarantee a thriving education for every tamariki growing up in this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe way that politicians from the Government side have spoken about the intentions of their Ministers represented in this very document would lead you to believe that we\u2019re a poor country, and yet we\u2019re actually the wealthiest we\u2019ve been as a country. But the decisions outlined in the Budget Policy Statement, as well as decisions that have been announced since, represent a Government that is not interested in ensuring that the resources that are out there get to those who need it the most. It is a Government that is preaching to families that it is time to tighten their wallets because times are getting tough while they have allowed landlords to get richer, while they have allowed the wealthiest in our country to disproportionately benefit from their tax cuts, while they parade cuts to public services.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a Government that claims to care for the squeezed middle, while completely disregarding the crushed bottom, people who, while this Budget Policy Statement was being drafted, were already struggling to make ends meet. We know this. The statistics from the Government\u2019s own side show that more people are requiring assistance from Work and Income to make ends meet. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDespite page 7 of the Finance and Expenditure Committee\u2019s report on this issue saying that the Government has focused on initiatives to lower unemployment, we\u2019re seeing record unemployment. We are seeing an increasingly high level of young people without a job, and these are the very same people that the Government has intentionally excluded from the relief package in light of the fuel crisis exacerbating the cost of living crisis that came as a result of the war in Iran, waged illegally by the United States and Israel.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s telling that the Government keeps telling us that they must run austerity Budgets to get to a surplus, that they must reduce Government debt, without actually acknowledging that it is going to be low-income families who will disproportionately pay the price. Every time that Governments across the world try to reduce Government debt by cutting public services and support for the poorest, they pass on the burden to households. We\u2019re already seeing this. Credit card debt is high. People are getting more and more into debt with Government agencies simply to make ends meet. Everyday people on the breadline are the scapegoats of this austerity Budget Policy Statement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey do not care if families go hungry so long as they can parade a surplus, and not all spending and cuts are made equal. We\u2019ve got a Government that seems quite happy to spend on some of the most expensive roading projects we have ever seen, while refusing to invest in things like rail that will actually better prepare us for economic shocks like the ones we are seeing right now. This is a Government that would rather lose revenue in order to give landlords more money and while allowing beneficiaries to go hungry. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI simply do not buy this myth that there isn\u2019t enough. There is enough, and a Budget Policy Statement that genuinely recognises that there is enough for everyone would be committed to ending poverty by taxing the wealthy few, by taxing excess profits that corporations are making while everybody else is struggling. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis Budget Policy Statement represents a Government that is not ruling for the many but for the few. They keep talking about the squeezed middle without even supporting the vast majority of them, and leaving the crushed bottom behind who will be getting further into debt and who risk getting further and closer into homelessness, as we are seeing out in the streets. A Green Party Budget Policy Statement would look exactly the opposite of what we\u2019re seeing in here and would put our communities front and centre, as opposed to the Government\u2019s wealthy mates. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022 data-id=\u00220de0cad6f95d72d37d6fb95483ea7615\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220de0cad6f95d72d37d6fb95483ea7615\u0022\u003ERYAN HAMILTON (National\u2014Hamilton East) (15:58)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, it never ceases to amaze us that we hear about new turns of phrase from the Green Party. It\u2019s always \u201CTax more. Spend more.\u201D Now, we\u2019ve learnt about the crushed bottom. I didn\u2019t know such a thing existed. I thought yesterday after the Minister\u2019s announcement, we were actually doing more for the people in socio-economic hard times by $50 a week to support those who are having more stress under rising fuel costs, but nevertheless, no doubt we\u2019ll hear more from Mr Men\u00E9ndez March about the crushed bottom.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Budget Policy Statement, and, of course, the Finance and Expenditure Committee (FEC) report on it, provided some very clear insights at the end of last year. Obviously, those things are in a very dynamic state at the moment, but I think it\u2019s important for context that we reflect on the goals that relate to that Budget Policy Statement, to build a stronger, more productive economy that lifts real incomes, and increases opportunity for New Zealanders; that delivers more efficient, effective, and responsible public services to all who need and use them; to restore law and order; and to get the Government\u2019s books back in order and restore discipline to public spending. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the Greens might call our Budgets austerity and say that they\u2019ve got more money to spend but on this side of the House, we refer to it as disciplined spending and good fiscal management. Also the Budget Policy Statement priorities are supporting the delivery of core public services\u2014such as healthcare, education, law and order\u2014and keeping tight control of discretionary Government spending.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe heard from Minister Seymour earlier about the operating allowance at $2.4 billion, and we\u2019ve kept that locked for the next few years in the Budget. That\u2019s actually quite a restrained operating allowance, but we have to be disciplined and still provide a bit of a buffer, of course. \u201CAddressing New Zealand\u2019s longer-term productivity challenges\u201D and \u201CDeveloping a sustainable pipeline of infrastructure investments\u201D\u2014those are the Budget Policy Statement goals and the priorities. You can see constantly through this House, we\u2019re talking about those priorities in all the policies and things that we\u2019re implementing. It\u2019s important that there\u2019s a consistency there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing I really wanted to draw attention to in the Budget Policy Statement was the fiscal strategy. \u201CNew Zealand is in a challenging fiscal position.\u201D\u2014and this was, obviously, of course, before the Iran fuel situation broke out\u2014\u201CThe Crown\u2019s books have deteriorated since 2019 as expenses have risen faster than revenue\u201D. I\u2019ll just draw attention to that year\u20142019, 2020\u2014and we know who was in Government at that time. \u201CThe increase in expenses as a percentage of GDP is due to a combination of factors: discretionary policy decisions, the temporary impact of the COVID-19\u201D\u2014and I\u2019ll return to that later, but I think it\u2019s important to give context, because this Budget Policy Statement obviously builds on those challenging times that we inherited.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing in particular that I thought is worth mentioning in the Budget Policy Statement is performance plans. Now, \u201CPerformance plans are plans for each government department\u2014and the Crown entities that fall under them\u2014to deliver public services within existing baselines\u201D, and I think that\u2019s a really key point. \u201CThe default assumption for performance plans is that there is no new funding.\u201D You might think, \u201CThat sounds very sensible. When did performance plans come to be?\u201D Well, 2024\u2014so another key year, and that was under the direction of a Minister of Finance where she said, \u201CWe must be clear about trade-offs, identify performance and delivery risks and set out how these risks will be managed. They are a tool that puts the focus on medium-term sustainability and lifting performance within existing expenditure, rather than on annual Budget initiatives.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis context is really important, because while the Opposition will say we\u2019re not doing enough or we\u2019re not spending enough or there\u2019s too much of an austerity Budget, the context we inherited was bleak. The interest alone we\u2019ve heard about is $10 billion a year\u2014enough to fund five Government departments on its own. It\u2019s vast\u2014it\u2019s vast. We don\u2019t like to continue to look in the rear-view mirror. We want to be a positive Government that focuses ahead, and we are, but it\u2019s really important the context is set, because we have got to manage the Budget that we\u2019ve got and work within those very real constraints.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EToday\u2019s debate on the FEC\u2019s report and the Budget Policy Statement comes at a time, obviously, of real uncertainty for New Zealand and real responsibility for this Government. The economic landscape has shifted significantly in recent months, and we\u2019ve got to adjust. The Fitch rating, we just heard, obviously, was looking at New Zealand\u2019s position a little bit more negative, which just shows the important work we\u2019ve been doing over the last two years. I can only imagine, if we hadn\u2019t taken such restraint on our debt and our management and the savings over consecutive Budgets, we would be in real trouble.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat COVID waste comes home to roost, with nearly $30 billion not even related to pandemic spending. I think of the large-scale asset programme, which left us with $10\u00A0billion of debt; the lump-sum payment, which sent payments out to French backpackers and dead people; and, of course, the shovel-ready projects, where there weren\u2019t any shovels anywhere near it\u2014they\u2019re still at Mitre 10 and Bunnings waiting to be picked up. That\u2019s the context we find ourselves in.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDespite these challenges, there are also signs of resilience in our economy. The most recent GDP data shows the economy grew 1.1 percent over the second half of 2026, and that is welcome. That is showing confidence is returning to business, to the manufacturing industry, particularly to the South Island, which you\u2019ll be pleased to hear, I\u2019m sure, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d also like to talk about the economic and fiscal outlook, which was referenced in that Budget Policy Statement. The Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update (HYEFU) shows the economy is recovering from a time of a prolonged downturn, with GDP expected to grow and unemployment forecast to decline from early 2026. Tax revenue forecasts reflect lower nominal GDP, with total tax revenue to be $1.7 billion over the forecast period. Core Crown expenses are forecast to decline gradually as a share of GDP, reaching 30.5 percent by 2029 and 2030. Net core Crown debt is projected to peak at 46.9\u00A0percent of GDP. Those are very high figures, and we\u2019d like to see them a lot lower, but it\u2019s going to take time. That\u2019s why the upcoming election is going to be critical for New Zealanders, to ensure that we keep on track and deliver for Kiwis as per those objectives and goals I referenced earlier.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EObviously, now, in the last four weeks, we\u2019ve had some real headwinds in Iran. The conflict in the Middle East has introduced a new level of uncertainty, and that was also referenced by the Reserve Bank Governor yesterday. We don\u2019t know how long this disruption will last, but that\u2019s why we\u2019ve been working so hard as a Government to build some resilience, some good management\u2014because we know that a rainy day will come, and it has come, and we\u2019re dealing with it today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYesterday, the Government pre-committed up to $373 million from that Budget allowance I spoke of to provide temporary, targeted, and timely support for working families\u2014$50 is a significant amount when you think of the price of fuel in the last few weeks. But I want to emphasise: temporary, targeted, and timely. Those were the key learnings of the Treasury document through the COVID royal commission that we\u2019ve learnt as a Government. We\u2019re taking those learnings from the gross spray of money that the previous administration had, and we\u2019re trying to do it in a way that doesn\u2019t create inflation, that doesn\u2019t ratchet debt and doesn\u2019t create a permanent expansion of the welfare system. I\u2019m sure, Madam Speaker, as you\u2019re aware, once you give something to someone, it\u2019s very hard to take back. We\u2019ve looked at that process very diligently and are very responsible stewards as Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOur fiscal strategy is clear. We will keep a tight lid on new spending. We will continue to find savings across Government, and I reference again those performance plans, where our Minister of Finance has said to Ministers and their officials, \u201CYou must, if you want new money, then try and replace it with old money. We\u2019ve got to live within our means.\u201D We will continue to find savings across Government, because every dollar we spend must deliver value for taxpayers, and we will keep debt under 50 percent of GDP before bending it back downwards. This is the only credible path to restoring New Zealand\u2019s fiscal health. It is the only way to build resilience.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to contrast what we hear from other parties in the House. They\u2019ve opposed every savings initiative we\u2019ve tried. They opposed our fast-track legislation, which was increasing renewable energy, solar farms, tax relief for New Zealanders that hadn\u2019t been done in 14 years\u2014every savings initiative we\u2019ve tried, they shut it down. It\u2019ll be interesting to see\u2014I think Labour\u2019s going to support us with our recent announcement, which is fantastic. We\u2019re doing the right thing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ea410b6d26385a71dca8d608eb526298\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The member\u2019s time has expired.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u00228ae4c2316d177ee9f9cc1994939bb9e3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228ae4c2316d177ee9f9cc1994939bb9e3\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (16:08)\u003C/span\u003E: I want to draw the House\u2019s attention to the date. It\u2019s 25 March. As Tolkien fans will know, that was, in fact, the day that Frodo\u2014well, actually, Gollum\u2014finally got the One Ring into the Crack of Doom and the realm of Sauron fell and it became the New Year ever after.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut that\u2019s not the significance of this date, really\u2014not today. In fact, the significance for us is that way, way back in 2020, 25 March was the eve of the COVID lockdown. The COVID lockdown\u2014first one\u2014started at 11.59 p.m. on 26 March. Of course, the Budget Policy Statement for that particular year\u2019s Budget had been delivered in December 2019. Between the delivery of the Budget Policy Statement and the actual Budget, the world had changed, and so it was very hard to prepare a Budget in those circumstances.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, a similar thing has happened this year. The Budget Policy Statement was delivered in December\u2014I think it was December.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022274a7f0cf02c00ca15cc50a6932f2cc5\u0022\u003EDan Bidois\u003C/span\u003E: 16 December.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022344d9959577d9f35b4572dd36b798a92\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. The Budget is due to be delivered in May. Between those two dates, the world has changed. There is a significant impact in the world of the current events.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, it\u2019s interesting listening to the members on that side of the floor saying that strategies and tactics need to change and that events overseas have a dramatic impact on New Zealand, because seemingly, when we were governing during COVID, that was not allowed. Somehow, it was all to happen magically and there was to be no impact on New Zealand from COVID. It\u2019s a little bit hard to know where to go with that; either we tell them to ignore what\u2019s going on overseas and just carry on\u2014but we all know that would be irresponsible\u2014or we actually acknowledge that world events do of course impact on New Zealand significantly. I think we need a little bit of humility from that side about what might or might not affect New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELooking at the Budget Policy Statement, which was delivered by the Minister of Finance last year, I want to draw the House\u2019s attention to some of the issues that sit in here. First of all is the ongoing discussion about a structural deficit. We know from people like the IMF, the World Bank, and our own Treasury that New Zealand faces a structural deficit\u2014that, over time, the amount of Government expenditure is projected to exceed the amount of Government revenue by quite a significant margin. We have a real issue as to what to do about that. Now, this Budget Policy Statement makes a proposal as to how to manage that: it is to cut and cut and cut\u2014to cut expenditure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe trouble is that what that Government came in and did is they cut revenue as well. That means that expenditure needs to be cut even further. We are seeing the impacts of those cuts now: the children who get inadequate lunches at schools; the healthcare system that is overloaded because people are using hospitals as a primary care source rather than being able to go to their own doctor. We see it in the increased number of people who cannot afford food and who are going to food banks. Those cuts have had a real impact. We need a better solution to the structural deficit than just cutting and cutting and cutting and cutting. Careful supervision of Government expenditure is always important, but blanket cuts, as put in place by that Government, mean that eventually we cut to the bone\u2014and that is what is happening with that Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister\u2019s statement goes on to talk about the economy recovering, and that\u2019s dubious. There\u2019s been a lot of talk of green shoots, but it was, I think, a 0.2 percent growth in GDP over the entire last year, and it was negative before that, and inflation is now creeping up again. The statement says the economy is recovering from a deep and protracted downturn, and the question has to be: what caused this? When this party was in Government, when we delivered the pre-election fiscal update, that pre-election fiscal update was predicting substantial recovery by now. But on their watch, that has turned into anaemic GDP growth. It has turned into increased people on unemployment and it has turned into more and more families seeking assistance. It\u2019s because that Government does not know how to support the economy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe problem with shutting down construction projects willy-nilly, just because Labour started them, is that that cuts down jobs, it cuts down small business, and it cuts down the cycle of money through the economy. Cutting construction projects cuts the economy. They need to consider being good Keynesians; in a downturn, the standard Keynesian rule is to spend in order to support the economy. The standard Keynesian approach is that, and yet they rejected it entirely. That is a problem with their fiscal management. When we talk about why there has been a prolonged and protracted downturn, the responsibility for that rests with their Minister of Finance. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf we go on to the report of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the Budget Policy Statement, I want to draw particular attention to two areas of it. One is around rising energy costs as a key contributor\u2014a key contributor\u2014to the difficulties in the economy. We need a fix for those rising energy costs. We need something that is better than just importing liquefied natural gas. In fact, the way to provide resilience in the energy sector\u2014the way to ensure that we have enough generation\u2014is to go much faster down the renewables route. It is to ensure\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b83b995dc0322d46c7c5b5b4f0d0d10b\u0022\u003ERyan Hamilton\u003C/span\u003E: Fast track.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022423630a83b85e17fb2ade5515cad5c08\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014that we get much more wind and solar power distributed on households, and then to use to some of our existing facilities\u2014our hydro lakes down south, our geothermal power\u2014as our firming. That leaves the peaking, and there are ways of fixing that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThey shout back at us \u201Cfast track\u201D. We had a fast-track process; they repealed it. We could not support their fast-track process because it abandoned the environment, and, frankly, we can do both. We can do the economy and the environment and fast track. We must consider the environment. What was wrong with the fast-track process that we had in place? Nothing, except that Labour did it, and so they flipped it. That was such a retrograde step, and it was a retrograde step that has contributed to the downturn in the economy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to draw our attention to one final area in the select committee\u2019s report. It was an area that the Minister didn\u2019t bother to address in her Budget Policy Statement, but the select committee did its job and brought this issue to attention. That is: what on earth we are to do with climate change? We hear this great line from that side of the House that the market\u2019s going to sort it all out\u2014well, that\u2019s not happening, is it? Emissions are continuing; we are losing our way on methane; we actually need to ensure that we get our climate emissions down. At the moment, the emissions trading scheme is not working to drive change on the climate. But the Minister didn\u2019t address any of that, let alone address some of the ways that Government could act to help industry and to help households to move away from fossil fuels. In fact, that Government has been investing in fossil fuels, investing in increasing emissions. What a ridiculous thing to do. Perhaps in the short term, that might pay off, but the long-term costs that they are leaving to our children and our children\u2019s children are reckless. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of what is going on in this economy, the Minister of Finance has delivered us a prolonged and protracted downturn; the Minister of Finance has delivered us cuts; the Minister of Finance has delivered us children going without meals; the Minister of Finances have given us superannuitants who are only having two meals a day. The Minister of Finance is a failure, and this Budget Policy Statement just reinforces that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b52eff5aa2a94fcc88903b73d0443de3\u0022 data-id=\u00224e06567e1826d94be1c337600496841f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b52eff5aa2a94fcc88903b73d0443de3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224e06567e1826d94be1c337600496841f\u0022\u003ENANCY LU (National) (16:18)\u003C/span\u003E: As a National Party member of Parliament, and as a member of the Finance and Expenditure Committee, I rise to support the Budget Policy Statement, and I do so with a very clear message: absolutely no to the spending, spending, spending on reckless projects like the last Government. This Government will not repeat the mistakes that left New Zealand with an inflation outbreak, with a cost of living crisis, and with public finances under immense strain. The Budget Policy Statement is not just a pre-Budget formality; it is a statement of the values of this Government. It says that this Government will back core public services, will keep control of spending, and will restore the fiscal discipline of Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBudget 2026, which will be delivered on 28 May 2026, will focus on health, education, law and order, and careful stewardship of public finances. That is the right approach, and it is opposite to the loose, undisciplined habits that got our country into the trouble we have now. Let us be honest about New Zealand and what we have learnt. We have learnt that, as a country, and as a Government, there is a difference between emergency support in genuine crisis and the continuing of spending as though there are no consequences. The Reserve Bank said, last October, that during the pandemic, aggressive fiscal and monetary support helped avert deeper harm, but that the combined responses ultimately contributed to an inflation outbreak.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETreasury\u2019s long-term insights briefing, highlighted by the finance Minister last August, examined the way the Government finances were used during and after the COVID period and said that the responses wound up costing NZ$66 billion\u2014NZ$66\u00A0billion is not a small policy error that the last Government can simply brush off. This is a massive lesson learnt, written by billions of New Zealand dollars that we could have spent on healthcare, on education, on infrastructure, on houses, on roads, on energy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWith higher prices, this is the suffering that we have now: with $66 billion splashed into the economy, it fuelled inflation, higher prices, and years of pain and pressure that now our generations of New Zealanders, and our future generations, have to suffer. Who pays the price for this? It is New Zealand. It is New Zealanders, all of us sitting in this room right now, and all of our children. It\u2019s families at the supermarket. It is mortgage holders at the bank. It\u2019s small businesses now having to pay more for freight, more wages, finance costs, and energy costs. When Government floods New Zealand with spending and then fails to turn the tap off, inflation does not remain in a line in the economists\u2019 charts. It hits kitchen tables. It hits supermarket aisles. It pushes up the cost of living for New Zealanders. It forces interest rates to go higher and higher. It pushes the prudent, and rewards nobody in New Zealand. That is the bitter lesson of the post-COVID period. While the opposite side of the House wants to forget this and wants to sweep it under the carpet, this side of the House is determined not to forget it, and most New Zealanders out there will not forget or forgive.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Reserve Bank\u2019s February 2026 Monetary Policy Statement says that inflation pressures are still being worked out of the system in New Zealand, with spare capacity only now just helping to reduce the domestic inflationary pressure and offset the persistent effects of past\u2014past\u2014high inflation. That tells its own story. That damage from the COVID and post-COVID period have not vanished overnight, and this is why the fiscal strategy now, in the Budget Policy Statement announced last December, matters so much.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis Government\u2019s Budget Policy Statement says clearly that one of its core goals, as a Government, is to get the Government\u2019s books back in order and to restore discipline in public spending.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the latest Budget Policy Statement also says that Budget 2026 will support core public services while maintaining tight control on discretionary spending. That matters because, just very recently, Fitch Ratings have now placed New Zealand\u2019s AA\u002B long-term credit rating on a negative outlook. The finance Minister, Nicola Willis, has explicitly said\u2014and she was right to exactly underline what that means for the fiscal pressure. If our rating goes down, it adds to the increased pressure in our interest costs. In other words, now the world is watching New Zealand, the market is watching New Zealand. The lesson from what we have learnt in the post-COVID period is very obvious: if we want resilience, credibility, and room to respond to shocks in New Zealand, no matter if they\u2019re average or large shocks, we as a Government need to be disciplined.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe timing of the lesson could not be more important. As noted by most speakers before me, as our economy has just begun to grow again, the conflict in the Middle East has created new, unexpected, unprecedented, historic, and huge uncertainty and huge risks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EStats NZ actually showed GDP, and the previous speaker, the Hon Dr Deborah Russell, who mentioned only just one-quarter of the growth\u2014very, very selective in her speech, that she failed to mention the 0.9 percent growth in the September 2025 quarter, then followed by another positive-growth quarter of 0.2 percent in the December quarter. Together, that is 1.1 percent growth in the last half-year of New Zealand. That is welcome. That is growth. That is evidence by Stats NZ.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut the Reserve Bank Governor also warned\u2014just yesterday, actually\u2014that the conflict in the Middle East now is likely to mean higher headline inflation pressure in the near-term and will somewhat weaken the growth momentum that we have finally developed through the green shoots, through Government control of spending, and which finally supported New Zealanders and small businesses to have the confidence to grow again. After the two years of work that we\u2019ve put in to this, to see finally that growth momentum\u2014what happened in the Middle East and what is happening right now have now just put a weaker growth momentum into New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, what kind of Government do we want to be when we look at what\u2019s happening around the world? We cannot be a Government who turn around now and say, \u201CActually, let\u2019s throw caution away. Don\u2019t worry about it, and bring back all the old habits and just spend, spend, spend and just let inflation go.\u201D That is a reckless Government\u2014that is a reckless Government. The Labour Government demonstrated what reckless spending will do to the New Zealand economy in the cost of living crisis, and it pushed up inflation. That\u2019s what the previous speaker was asking for. She\u2019s asking for a no to the cut, cut, cut; she\u2019s asking for more spending, spending, spending.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is something that we, as the National Government, have learnt: we have learnt that discipline is not cruelty; discipline now in our Government spending is actually about protecting New Zealand, to give Government headroom to act when the next shock arrives. This is particularly important for New Zealand as we are a country that is exposed to natural disasters, obviously to global brutality, obviously to trade disruptions. So if we spend everything now, when the time is politically convenient, then we will be left with nothing\u2014that when times are genuinely hard, we are left with nothing. This is why the National Government\u2019s response this week has been a particularly right one. Not splashy, not permanent, not performative, but temporary, targeted, and timely support for 143,000 of the working families with children, to support them through this very tough time, through the in-work tax credit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, our Government is very explicit: our support is designed to help households facing the fuel price pressure, without making inflation worse for New Zealand and without further driving up the Government debt. That is the difference between helping people or simply using it as an excuse to abuse spending.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI hereby support the Budget Policy Statement. It is the right statement at the time because it reflects discipline, maturity, and lessons that the National Government have learnt. We are here to support New Zealand through this tough time in the economy, through exactly what we need to be doing for the entire country to make sure that we are supporting all the families, particularly those who are suffering from the higher cost of living pressure, particularly with the Iran crisis. So I commend the Budget Policy Statement to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220fe7508c7b8a47378c4c88fe1ce69fcb\u0022 data-id=\u0022ced6f205fb9c0dbb9e2d0b6354f65e6b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fe7508c7b8a47378c4c88fe1ce69fcb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ced6f205fb9c0dbb9e2d0b6354f65e6b\u0022\u003ECUSHLA TANGAERE-MANUEL (Labour\u2014Ikaroa-R\u0101whiti) (16:28)\u003C/span\u003E: \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003ET\u0113n\u0101 koe e te M\u0101ngai o te Whare, otir\u0101 t\u0101tou katoa.\u003C/span\u003E It\u2019s a privilege to stand for the Labour Party to make a contribution on the Budget Policy Statement and Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe opening remarks referenced the Minister of Finance stating that Budget 2026 will be a \u201Cresponsible Budget\u201D. Let\u2019s reflect upon what responsible budgeting has looked like for M\u0101ori under this National-led Government so far: Te Aka Whai Ora, the M\u0101ori Health Authority, gone; cuts to M\u0101ori housing; cuts to M\u0101ori trade training budgets; cuts to M\u0101ori education programmes; cuts to M\u0101ori economic development programmes; removal of references to Te Tiriti o Waitangi; Progressive Procurement, which contributed $900\u00A0million to M\u0101ori business and the M\u0101ori\u2014and, therefore, New Zealand\u2014economy, gone. Programmes which had a direct impact on affordability and the quality of life for wh\u0101nau across Aotearoa, who we know are already doing it tough, were slashed\u2014slashed to the tune of $1 billion; $1 billion of targeted M\u0101ori funding was cut\u2014that is what responsible budgeting looks like under this National-led Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe economic context provided in the report acknowledges a decrease in the 2023 Treasury GDP forecast for 2026, from $304 billion to $289.6 billion, which is a decrease of 4.7 percent since the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Update. When I hear \u201CGDP\u201D, I think instantly of the M\u0101ori economy. The impressive growth of the M\u0101ori economy\u2019s contribution to GDP from $17 billion, or 6.5 percent, in 2018, to $32 billion, or 8.9\u00A0percent, in 2023 is widely discussed in this House, but, sadly, it is not valued or, indeed, emulated. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe M\u0101ori economy grew from $69 billion in 2018 to $126 billion in 2023. That growth has come from very little. They have grown assets which are not merely commodities which can be bought and sold, but taonga tuku iho\u2014treasures to be managed for generations. That\u2019s responsible budgeting. Iwi and business have all done it in their own unique way, but with one common value at the centre: people\u2014\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003Ehe tangata, he tangata, he tangata\u003C/span\u003E. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m reminded of a whakatauk\u012B: \u201C\u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003EM\u0101 te huruhuru ka rere te manu\u003C/span\u003E\u201D\u2014\u201CFeathers give the bird flight\u201D. That whakatauk\u012B has become synonymous with money these days. However, we understand that there are many forms of feather, many ways to give a bird flight: a warm, dry home, a good education, gainful employment, and the ability to afford the basics. The Government will argue that M\u0101ori still have access to these things under this Budget, but the fact is that cutting $1 billion of targeted funding has deprived M\u0101ori of the opportunity to provide services in our way and to thrive as us within our own systems, and, frankly, it\u2019s deprived non-M\u0101ori from having the experience and benefiting from that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a targeted attempt to clip our feathers, and it will not succeed. I want to acknowledge all the iwi, hap\u016B, and community organisations who are thriving in spite of all the cuts and who will continue to do so in spite of this Government, not because of it. The Labour Party see you. We have a plan for the future which absolutely includes the thriving M\u0101ori economy and thriving M\u0101ori communities. Labour is ready with a plan and ready to work with hap\u016B, iwi, and wh\u0101nau M\u0101ori. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022df3e6766443b46819410ad4fedf34077\u0022 data-id=\u0022fe096c2bde01e6912d9675a1961e7bc5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df3e6766443b46819410ad4fedf34077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fe096c2bde01e6912d9675a1961e7bc5\u0022\u003ESTUART SMITH (National\u2014Kaik\u014Dura) (16:33)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. It\u2019s a pleasure to speak on the Budget Policy Statement and the Finance and Expenditure Committee\u2019s report on it, and I congratulate the chair and the committee members. I think that Cameron Brewer has done a great job on reviewing that\u2014fantastic.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ll come to the issues in there, and, actually, I will just start off\u2014I think it was mentioned before\u2014by saying that this is the beginning of the Budget process coming up, with this Budget Policy Statement. It sets out what the Government hopes to achieve, and I\u2019ll go through those points in a minute, but I wanted to address what the Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori speaker gave us. In short, her speech was about saying that the Government\u2019s role is, essentially, to hand money out to different groups. Ironically, that\u2019s not the case, and it was almost as though the Government has money that it gives out, but the Government doesn\u2019t have money. It raises money from taxes or it borrows, or it does a combination of both, and one of the things that I think is quite important to understand is the size of the debt that we currently owe as a country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is a significant amount of money and we are actually trying to get on top of that, but a big part of that came about over the COVID period, when we borrowed $60 billion, $30\u00A0billion of which didn\u2019t go to COVID expenses. We\u2019re now paying the price for that, and it\u2019s a big price. We\u2019re paying $10 billion in interest now, and that\u2019s in a year. That is the combined expenses of the New Zealand Police, the Department of Corrections, the Ministry of Justice, the Customs Service, and the New Zealand Defence Force. What could we have done with that to expend that money in other areas of Government? That money doesn\u2019t come just out of anywhere; it\u2019s a significant issue for us to address. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhy is that important? Because one of the things that New Zealand is really known for is its low sovereign risk. That is very important, because when we borrow money, that\u2019s based on the premise of how we\u2019re going to pay it back, and that\u2019s where the sovereign risk comes in. Unfortunately, our good reputation for our sovereign risk profile was trashed with the summary announcement of the oil and gas ban some years ago. Now, I know from some contacts in the finance industry how that has directly affected New Zealand. One entity that I know of was lining up an investment from money markets, and they were told, \u201CNo, we\u2019re not going to give you that money any more.\u201D It was all signed off and they cancelled it, and they said, \u201CLook, mate, you had one thing going for you. It was low sovereign risk, and you don\u2019t have that any more.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is why it is so important that the Budget Policy Statement and Budgets are actually very fiscally restrained and responsible, because that adds cost to our borrowing. It definitely adds cost to everything that we do in New Zealand, and it is really important for the health of our economy. What does the health of the economy mean? It means jobs, food on the table for people, and having people being looked after in the way that we would expect. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe main priority of this Budget\u2014and the thing that mostly stands out for me in the Budget Policy Statement\u2014is to deliver more efficient and effective core public services. Well, that is a great thing to have as a priority, particularly the focus on health, education, and law and order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, if we look at those particular areas, we\u2019ve already made a great start on that by setting health targets. Everything in every business and endeavour has targets; why shouldn\u2019t health? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EEducation: an hour of reading, writing, and maths\u2014fantastic. That\u2019s the future that we\u2019re investing in and we should focus on that, and the feedback from the schools and from parents is that that has been such a hit that children are making real progress in the confidence that they are growing, and we\u2019re growing really good Kiwis out of that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn law and order, we have had great work by Mark Mitchell and the team, and the Hon Paul Goldsmith. There is a fantastic amount of work that they\u2019ve done in that area. People deserve to feel safe in their homes, and they should be able to go to the supermarket and not see people run through the checkout with a trolley full of groceries and not pay for it. That is stealing from everyone, and so we stand by that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a fantastic Budget Policy Statement\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002235984f61527b4059ae9284acf3c4076b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b1ef11910ffc957726fde664d2319ce9\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh)\u003C/span\u003E: The member\u2019s time has expired.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022 data-id=\u002233824d07ea54037bde0a5393c74a1212\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002233824d07ea54037bde0a5393c74a1212\u0022\u003EHon GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour) (16:38)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks very much, Madam Speaker. Thank you for the opportunity. New Zealand has a moment of urgency when we look at what confronts us right now. I think that it\u2019s important that in this Budget Policy Statement (BPS), which outlines really clear goals and objectives that will guide the Government\u2019s decisions in the forthcoming Budget, it shows the short-term fiscal intentions but also, importantly, the long-term fiscal objectives and strategies. That\u2019s what I\u2019d like to focus on today, because there is a real lack of long-term fiscal objectives in any kind of strategy in the long term that this Government has offered New Zealand. That is really the key reason why we have such a high level of uncertainty, both in our business community but also in the homes of families who are just trying to make ends meet on a day-to-day basis.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe level of uncertainty that has been brought about by this Government not having a plan for the future has become absolutely heartbreaking for many families up and down the country. The 2026 BPS says that the Government will focus on \u201Csupporting the delivery of core public services such as healthcare [and] education\u201D. But we know that there have been significant cuts right across the Public Service that have directly impacted on the types of those essential services that families desperately rely on. Being able to go and get good quality healthcare without having to have a huge fee is something that most families would love to see\u2014what we want to see.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, they\u2019ve talked a lot about tight control of discretionary Government spending, while funding a very small amount of Government policy commitments. But I think it\u2019s important to note that we need some really good examples\u2014tangible examples\u2014that people who may be sitting at home or listening in could understand, because when this Government talks about \u201Cwasteful spending\u201D, they never really provide some good examples of what that would be. So I\u2019ve got some really good ones. One is going to have the ribbon cut on it by probably Chris Bishop, I\u2019m guessing: that would be the shared pathway in Eastbourne; $15 million of COVID funding went into that \u201Cwasteful spending\u201D. Also, the beloved RiverLink project, a key infrastructure project in the Hutt Valley\u2014that also received very \u201Cwasteful\u201D COVID spending. And Te Ara Tupua, the significant piece of infrastructure between Wellington here and out to the Hutt Valley, right along the harbour way into Petone: that also received that \u201Cwasteful spending\u201D that\u2019s being referred to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo we can be assured; we\u2019ll make sure we line up with you hecklers when that ribbon gets cut to remind this Government that when it talks about \u201Cwasteful spending\u201D, they\u2019re very quick to turn up, to cut the ribbon and claim the glory and say that they\u2019ve done good things\u2014because those infrastructure projects, they were long-term thinking. They were good plans that gave people in the Hutt Valley jobs. They gave local businesses an ability to make kai for those workers, and they sustained a local economy that actually looked after people and gave them opportunity. Those were all the side benefits to the key pieces of infrastructure that they also funded through that \u201Cwasteful\u201D COVID spending. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat has happened since then? What has happened since then is we\u2019ve seen a change: instead of having jobs created, instead of having local businesses sustained through all the stimulation that those projects had, we\u2019ve seen cuts. We\u2019ve seen significant projects cancelled by this Government, and that has sustained record job losses in our construction sector. Over 20,000 workers have left the New Zealand construction sector, because project after project was canned. Massive investment under way for K\u0101inga Ora social housing builds, for school rebuilds, for health rebuilds\u2014all of that good work that was under way, that was canned, that was put on ice, and that was cancelled. What was the direct result? We saw an exodus of construction workers going to Australia. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart of that: the Wellington local economy saw those jobs\u2014and on top of the pain of that construction sector downward spiralling, we saw thousands of Public Service jobs also gone: 10,000 jobs across the Wellington region. What has that done to our local economy and Wellington and the Hutt Valley? That has meant that businesses have liquidated at record numbers. That\u2019s mum and dad businesses who have built their lives and their livelihoods that have then gone under. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA local business in Petone operating for 20 years: Soprano\u2014fantastic local business, a family; the husband and wife actually met there as waiter and waitress. They bought the business, they brought their kids up in their business. That was their life. They sustained that business right through the pandemic, and they kept going. But do you know what they couldn\u2019t withstand? This National Government and the cuts that it did to Wellington and our region. It could not withstand, and it is heartbreaking to see people\u2019s lives and livelihoods wilt before their eyes because this Government is more interested in cutting and serving\u2014self-serving\u2014their own interests than actually providing a meaningful future for families here in New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019s really heartbreaking to see that happen, but what\u2019s important to note is that what we want to see is a long-term fiscal plan; things like KiwiSaver, enabling people to save\u2014and not just increasing the person\u2019s increase, as this Government\u2019s solution is. People are already having to withdraw their KiwiSaver because of hardship. This Government\u2019s response is, \u201COh, pay some more, but we won\u2019t.\u201D\u2014so people continue not to save for their future. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Superannuation Fund: it\u2019s that Government over there that actually stopped the Government contributions to growing our future nest egg for this nation, and it\u2019s previous Labour Governments that restarted that and enabled us to grow a super fund that can work. It\u2019s having those assets, having them and keeping them in New Zealand hands and making sure we work smarter, that provides a real future for our country\u2014one with foresight, one where we can make our assets work for us smarter, and to have deeper capital markets here in New Zealand so we can back smart Kiwi businesses instead of watching them go offshore. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe can list business after business in New Zealand that get to a certain level and can\u2019t sustain investment here in New Zealand, and they get snapped up and they go off to other countries. Not only do we lose that great intellectual property here in New Zealand; we lose all of the opportunities of our young people training and getting experience and growing, and we lose all of that potential and that financial gain\u2014because we need to be able to back Kiwi companies, keep them here, and keep them growing for us. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut what do we see? We see Wattie\u2019s closing down. We see McCain\u2019s closing down. Those growers in Hastings, those growers in those areas, where are they going to put the veggies now? This Government has no answers. They are, in fact, hollowing out local economies region by region. It\u2019s the big business, it\u2019s the big end of town, that reap those rewards\u2014not our small growers, not those people just trying to be able to make enough to make ends meet and to actually make a profit in their businesses, because there is very little support for a long-term way of figuring out how we\u2019re going to make those things work.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we\u2019ll see is we\u2019ll see cheaper products that are manufactured offshore being dumped in our markets, and there will be no way out\u2014of getting on top of a supermarket duopoly\u2014if we are shutting down our own growers and our own local processing of our own kai. There are no answers from those members opposite on how to keep good Kiwi businesses here and grow them\u2014because we have a future fund, and our future fund is focused on growing our assets to back our people and keep our futures here, because we want a future for our children in New Zealand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019re not prepared to say, \u201CJust go off to Australia and find a higher-paying job over there. You just go off and go to another country.\u201D Record levels of New Zealanders are, sadly, giving up hope, packing their bags and leaving, never to come back, because this Government provides no long-term vision for what they\u2019re going to do to make Kiwis\u2019 lives better here\u2014to make those lives affordable, to make sure you can actually be able to pay your rent, to pay your mortgage, to put some fuel in the car, and to be able to have a decent life here in New Zealand. They are more than happy to pass bill after bill, and watch legislation drive down workers\u2019 wages, drive down our ability to have a good life here. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a tough time for our country and the world, and what we need right now is a Government with some heart, and over there we have a lacklustre bunch who are self-serving and only interested in serving their own short-term gains and not really caring about the future of Aotearoa New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022 data-id=\u002294ea3a6d66c64f53af51fccd3de7efe5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002294ea3a6d66c64f53af51fccd3de7efe5\u0022\u003EDAN BIDOIS (National\u2014Northcote) (16:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that was a great general debate speech\u2014but pity this is not a general debate; this is a debate on the Budget Policy Statement (BPS). I have a copy with me if the previous speaker, the Hon Ginny Andersen, actually wishes to read it and reference it in her speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut let\u2019s get back, and it\u2019s my privilege to round off this two-hour debate on the Budget Policy Statement, which is a formality as part of the Public Finance Act. The Minister of Finance tabled this document in the House on 16 December alongside the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update, and I would encourage members to read this; this is a very important document to go alongside the BPS.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt has been noted today that the last few months goes very quickly. I do wish to speak about where we\u2019ve come from, from the fiscals; where we are; but, more importantly, where we\u2019re going in light of the recent conflict in Iran and the economic consequences of that. The first is what we inherited. Our nominal public debt when National took office more than doubled under the previous Government to $155 billion. That was about 2.5 times the previous debt that we left them when they came into office in 2017. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet\u2019s continue: the operating balance before gains and losses Budget deficit for the 2023 year was $10 billion. It was 2.5 percent of GDP, and Treasury said that that was one of the highest Budget deficits in the OECD. Now, I say this because if you want to reduce the debt levels that this country has, you first need to close the deficit. The harsh facts of the matter are that we are still in deficit as a country, but that is largely thanks to the deficit that we have been left and inherited from the previous Government. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet\u2019s continue on. The inflation level of this country was at 7.3 percent. Thankfully, that\u2019s been over halved, but the future does not look bright. The annual bill or the interest cost of servicing that debt\u2014let\u2019s look at that. When we were voted out in 2017, we had about $2 billion of annual debt interest. That increased by $5.2 billion, to about $8 billion by the time we came back into office. That\u2019s $8 billion a year that we\u2019re just paying alone to service the debt. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut that was then, as David Wilson said; this is now, and the situation looks somewhat different 2\u00BD years into our first tenure in office after a few tough years. Inflation is down, as I said; GDP growth, we had about 1.1 percent over the second half of 2026. The finance Minister was running very, very tight operating allowances. She found about $40 billion in savings, to date, and we were on track to bend the debt curve down by the 2028-29 year, but we did hear very clearly from Treasury officials that fiscal consolidation has not happened. I say that because the other side likes to say we\u2019re cutting spending, we\u2019re cutting the civil service, but the harsh reality is that spending is still growing. We are still spending far more than we\u2019re taking in as a Government. Treasury officials have sounded the alarm bells. I remember sitting in the Finance and Expenditure Committee and hearing very clearly from Iain Rennie that fiscal consolidation has not happened. So we\u2019ve got a lot to do as a Government, and I would rather trust this side of the House any day with that objective than that side of the House with that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to turn, now, to the challenges that we face, because, of course, in the last few weeks, things have moved quickly and the fiscal and economic challenges that we face as a result of the conflict in the Middle East are serious. I wish to bring members to the attention of a speech that the Reserve Bank Governor gave a few days ago, which outlined those fiscal and economic impacts closely. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, of course, those impacts depend on when that conflict ends and also the ability for the Strait of Hormuz to return to somewhat normal levels of production. The governor has said very clearly in her expectations\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222c6463d70604436695b4f49ebe8951ef\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224ec581f52f9aefd4bd9a47e0f3c7d19b\u0022\u003EHon Rachel Brooking\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, is that talked about in the document you\u2019re just waving around?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b7cff05e64f346e68983b2fdbfba3ad8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e18159338a5ca95ff2fbd158bfc707d6\u0022\u003EDAN BIDOIS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and I do mention this because it is part of the Budget fiscal policy around inflation expectations. Come and have a look at it, but the inflation expectations in this document are wildly different to the inflation expectations that New Zealand faces today because of external events\u2014nothing to do with this Government. We are taking the events in the Middle East as given.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe governor has said very clearly that inflation will rise in the medium term, that the economy will grow less than it has been forecast under the BPS and that will put strain on the fiscals in its entirety. The Minister of Finance has said today, \u201CLook, actually, on balance, the net impact on the balance sheet is not going to be positive.\u201D For most New Zealanders\u2014those two that are watching at home\u2014the Government is not making money out of this crisis. On balance, the impact on the Government\u2019s books will be negative.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt is that backdrop that sets the scene for the Budget to come later on in May, which will show a negative impact on the Government books. That has already been alluded to in the ratings of external agencies such as from Fitch Ratings, which has put New Zealand on negative watch. I say this because New Zealand has near on $200 billion of nominal debt and that has an interest attachment to that. That interest is dependent on the yield that investors wish to\u2014basically, the risk premium that investors wish to lend to us. Over the last few weeks, that risk premium has gone up and we should expect it is going to make a difference to the Budget that is going to be announced in May. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo what does this all mean for the people at home? Well, what this will mean is we\u2019re going to need a Government that maintains fiscal prudence. I certainly wish to acknowledge the $373 million package that the finance Minister announced this week to reach those really struggling low and middle income New Zealanders\u2014about 140,000 according to chairman Cameron Brewer and Minister Simon Watts. But we can\u2019t afford to give money out left, right, and centre, and, you know, not everybody\u2019s going to be happy with that announcement, but I think that will go some way to helping the most vulnerable people in our communities deal with the oil shock that we face, but we have to maintain this fiscal prudence in the future. That means making sure that we constrain spending as much as possible and that we maintain the momentum to get fiscal consolidation actually under way and happening because the risk premium that we pay on the debt is dependent on investors saying and having confidence in us getting back to surplus. If they don\u2019t have confidence in us getting back to surplus, then we\u2019re going to be paying more for the debt that we currently have. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn the last minute of this debate, I want to finish on a positive, which is: this Government does have a plan and that plan is all about going for growth. We actually have positive momentum heading out of this BPS, starting into this year, and that will serve us well dealing with the oil shock that we have. Now is not the time for profligate spending, taxing, and borrowing, and hoping that that will get through it; it\u2019s actually a time for good fiscal prudence, of which this side has in spades. I look forward to the campaign ahead and campaigning for a better, brighter fiscal future for this country, for our kids, and for our grandkids. I commend the BPS to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the House take note of the report of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the Budget Policy Statement 2026.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022302c0cc470239e5a968d25d5295b631d\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022258887ceb8208a18b88e376c804b1100\u0022\u003EAppropriation (2024/25 Confirmation and Validation) Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a00518541b75060dc11608ae6e7b89d0\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022f9bd4530bcef19d0b9b4ba0b5313e6e3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f9bd4530bcef19d0b9b4ba0b5313e6e3\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (17:00)\u003C/span\u003E: on behalf of the \u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBold\u0022\u003EMinister of Finance\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Appropriation (2024/25 Confirmation and Validation) Bill be now read a second time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the Appropriation (2024/25 Confirmation and Validation) Bill be now read a second time\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 53\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 13; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002262364f465d0d57c33adcb074b0f2ea1f\u0022\u003ELocal Government (Auckland Council) (Transport Governance) Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00222530cd4a7983c121c29432568e6c0b9f\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000501\u0022\u003EDebate resumed from 24 March 2026.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002201f738f244724e5b8da066dba7a6a526\u0022 data-id=\u0022dc8e2d50acc28e96c8716e8635af928c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002201f738f244724e5b8da066dba7a6a526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dc8e2d50acc28e96c8716e8635af928c\u0022\u003EDr TRACEY McLELLAN (Labour) (17:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Speaker. We are nearing the end of this debate, and the Local Government (Auckland Council) (Transport Governance) Amendment Bill has been largely agreed upon by all parties in this House, but there\u2019s still quite a bit to talk about here. Let\u2019s have a little bit of a refresh on where we got up to last night. There are a few specific points that I would like to make, both in summary of the main points but also in acknowledgment of all of the submitters and all of the work that\u2019s gone on behind the scenes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would like to acknowledge the work of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee and also acknowledge all of the work that the staff do, not only on this bill but on all of the bills that go through this House. This was an interesting bill insofar as the origins and the impetus for it largely came from the Auckland Council itself, and I also acknowledge that there will be a plethora of staff members who would have worked on this plan for quite some time before it even made its way to this House\u2014so I acknowledge them as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a piece of reform that\u2019s largely grounded in a clear problem, which is good because we don\u2019t always see that in this House. Sometimes, when Government bills come to this House, it\u2019s not always obvious what problem they are trying to solve. This bill responds to two longstanding issues\u2014those being redressing or rebalancing or refixing, depending on how you view it, a lack of democratic accountability; and also the poor coordination that has tended to happen across agencies over the long term when dealing with issues of transport. Auckland\u2019s size, I think, makes those issues all the more visible and a little bit more salient, but they\u2019ve certainly been building for quite some time. It\u2019s not just change for the sake of change; it\u2019s actually trying to fix some structural problems that actually do impact on final outcomes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EObviously, we are supporting this bill, and we enjoyed going through the process. Whether or not I would call it \u201Clocalism\u201D, I think, is still up for debate. We heard that term being used in previous contributions yesterday. I think it does at least provide some clarity and not just control, so we are supporting this bill because it comes from that perspective. We do think that localism is good, and it\u2019s always good to provide that clarity. More than that, it also delineates and makes very specific who\u2019s responsible for what. Under the old model, the decision making, essentially, sat at arm\u2019s length, and accountability, I think it\u2019s fair to say, didn\u2019t always naturally follow from that. These were changes that were made by a previous National-ACT Government in establishing Auckland Transport, but bringing these functions back now under elected members feels like the right thing to do. It strengthens, we believe, both voice and responsibility.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother thing that was brought up, both during the process at the Transport and Infrastructure Committee and in previous contributions, is acknowledging that the 30-year plan, I think, is one of the most important shifts. Often, the focus is on governance structures, which is all very well and good, but the long-term planning piece that sits behind this is also just as important. The 30-year transport plan, in particular, that\u2019s jointly owned by council and Government is intended to try to fix some of the stop-start nature of the reality of investments when they can get a bit of steam up and a bit of wind under their wings and then not progress in the way that would be advantageous. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere was widespread support for this from the submissions. It wasn\u2019t universal, and there were some submissions that certainly raised some concerns, and I\u2019ll go through those shortly. All of the submissions were very, very welcome and, I think, actually helped inform some of the changes that were made in select committee, as you\u2019d expect. There\u2019s a deliberate balance between expertise and democracy, and that was one of the tensions that was resolved during the process. It was one of the more interesting tensions, I should also add, because some people who were supportive of this bill were really supportive of bringing decision making back to elected members, and others also valued the technical expertise that could be found in a different model. There is a way to achieve balance, and I think we worked quite hard in the select committee process to achieve that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill tries, as I said, to strike that balance by retaining Auckland Transport as a council-controlled organisation, and they now have a mandate to look after public transport delivery. There are, I think, some valid concerns about how specific that is and how much detail has been provided and how that will actually sort of play out. At this point, it\u2019s a watching brief, and shifts that strategic control\u2014which I think is important\u2014back to council. The balance here is the important thing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs was mentioned last night by my colleague Tangi Utikere, the local boards have been empowered via this bill, but with some trade-offs. The move to give local boards that statutory transport power, I think, is significant. It could and it should strengthen that local voice, particularly when we\u2019re talking about roads, speed limits, active transport, and things like that that, actually, communities know best for themselves. Submitters did also raise some concerns, though, that there was the potential that some of that decision making could become fragmented across, I think there\u2019s 21, local boards. There will be some work needed in that sphere to make sure that that decision making doesn\u2019t become fragmented, and that will be a legitimate challenge for local decision making, but I think vesting that local decision making with those boards is a good outcome.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother major reform that I think is worth just reminding ourselves about is the fact that, ultimately, it is Aucklanders who will judge whether this works or not. There were a few other\u2014I\u2019m hesitant to term them minor details because, actually, from a practical point of view and from a logistics point of view, they\u2019re actually quite significant. They weren\u2019t necessarily the headline issues that submitters made their submissions on. We received 47 submissions in all; 23 were in support and 23 opposed it. That might seem like it was relatively sort of split, but when you analysed what the commentary was in those submissions, there were lots of themes where people were very supportive and agreed. Certainly, the 30-year transport plan was one of those. Supporters also emphasised accountability through elected members, and we\u2019ve heard several people from both sides of the House make contributions about how that might play out in real life. There were some mixed views on how concerns about fragmentation could play out, but, overall, submitters didn\u2019t just express these views. As I said, I think that really did feed into making the improvements that were necessary, and the select committee is quite pleased with the final output, so to speak.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESome of those changes that were made, or a couple in particular, were about specifying what would happen to, essentially, excess land and not just letting public land simply fall away and disappear because it wasn\u2019t made explicit where that should go. So that is named, namely, with the NZ Transport Agency and KiwiRail\u2014that has made that explicit, just to have that safeguard and also ensuring that the committee, and therefore the entity, still comes under the Ombudsman, which I think is really important as well. There are a few other smaller ones, like making sure the transport plan is available and in accessible formats, making sure that the by-law - making process actually functions in practice. There was some lowering of the threshold, so that decision makers must have regard to freight and public transport rather than meet an overly high bar. But overall, whilst I said these weren\u2019t necessarily headline grabbers, they still matter and are still worth mentioning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo what came through very clearly was that there\u2019s broad agreement with some very good feedback that we were able to tweak through the select committee process. On the basis of that, we think that the bill creates the conditions for a much more accountable and better system. Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022 data-id=\u00224833dfcd5240e9f485ee2a1b2e63ff5a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022587d574de1174371be09e431d9060e87\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224833dfcd5240e9f485ee2a1b2e63ff5a\u0022\u003ECAMERON BREWER (National\u2014Upper Harbour) (17:12)\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s great, as an Auckland MP, to be able to stand up and support this Local Government (Auckland Council) (Transport Governance) Amendment Bill at its second reading. This is the Government that\u2019s making Auckland Transport more accountable to Auckland ratepayers. It\u2019s transferring most of Auckland Transport\u2019s functions back to Auckland Council. This is the Government that\u2019s establishing an Auckland Regional Transport Committee\u2014council and Crown working collectively, members appointed from each side\u2014on a 30-year integrated transport plan for the region. This is the Government that will ensure that Auckland Transport has good governance, great strategy, and planning, with it all\u2014mostly\u2014going back to Auckland Council. It\u2019s a great day in the reform of Auckland Transport. I commend the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a2d138cbb839455d9754acbe91a75102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f447bd1b9a69f7dec6b18bf39da1a2aa\u0022\u003ESPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2025-26, Compliance Simplification, and Remedial Measures) Bill, the Online Casino Gambling Bill, and the Antisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002295d1e9a1e9fa53557ba73cd056076b54\u0022\u003ETaxation (Annual Rates for 2025\u201326, Compliance Simplification, and Remedial Measures) Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e62250c777791f42a37a6f43a092448a\u0022\u003ECommittee of the Whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u002250ebec9829067eb1e1db57b308298e02\u0022\u003EPart 1 Annual rates of income tax\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb92c0595f83120d9277a96a6a71c0b6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the House is in committee for consideration of the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2025-26, Compliance Simplification, and Remedial Measures) Bill, for further consideration of the Online Casino Gambling Bill and for consideration of the Antisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ll start with the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2025-26, Compliance Simplification, and Remedial Measures) Bill and the debate on Part 1. Part 1 is the debate on clause 3, \u201CAnnual rates of income tax\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221dc3d7f8d2d7f014a0d60b40fb673575\u0022\u003EHon Dr Deborah Russell\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, thank you for allowing me to set the scene for this part of the of the bill and the debate. The bill in front of us is the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2025-26, Compliance Simplification, and Remedial Measures) Bill\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002282e08876bcd0537f4bd0ec9f9c6162ee\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry to the member. Sorry, I\u2019ve just stopped a little bit short of an instruction to the House. I know that she will be rearing to go, but I\u2019m sure you\u2019ll get that back to where you were.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThis is the debate where the debate on tax rates should take place, but the vote on any proposed amendments to the tax rates will take place in Part 2, which amends the Income Tax Act 2007. Standing Order 352 requires that the annual taxing provision be considered separately. The question is that Part 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022f4e56f5ab77993dea6928996b18d30a9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f4e56f5ab77993dea6928996b18d30a9\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (17:15)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, thank you. I\u2019m delighted to have the opportunity to set the scene for this committee stage and for this debate on Part 1 of the bill. This is an interesting bill, the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2025-26, Compliance Simplification, and Remedial Measures) Bill, and there\u2019s a lot of real substance in it that we will want to discuss.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust to run through some of the substance that\u2019s in there that we will get to in later stages, there are rules around digital nomads, there are adjustments to the foreign investment fund rules\u2014really good ones\u2014some great measures around employee share schemes and income from the sale of excess electricity; some good work on GST and joint venture rules; some stuff that we don\u2019t agree with on information sharing, but we\u2019ll get to that; and a couple of Amendment Papers, one which has some changes to the thin capitalisation rules; and some pretty interesting changes to student loan rules which haven\u2019t been signalled anywhere else\u2014so there will be a bit of a discussion on that. And then, of course, there\u2019s Amendment Paper 590, which is the one that puts in place the Government\u2019s policy, announced yesterday, of adjusting the in-work tax credit rate and amount. We\u2019ll need to have an extensive discussion on that in Part 2 when we get to it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 sets the annual tax rates, and it\u2019s a constitutional requirement that\u2014there are couple of things here: first of all, this bill must be signed into law before the tax year ends. Now, the tax year ends on 31 March and, counting on my fingers, we\u2019ve got the rest of tonight and tomorrow morning, which is officially part of tonight, for the committee stage, and then, all going well, I understand that the third reading will be tomorrow afternoon on what will technically be Thursday\u2014if the committee stage is finished by then. I notice the Minister of Revenue is grimacing at that thought. That becomes complicated because if we don\u2019t get through the committee stage today and if we go into tomorrow\u2014and I don\u2019t mean tomorrow morning; I mean tomorrow afternoon\u2014we cannot then have the third reading, and the next time the House is sitting is on 31 March. For the third reading, it would have to be some pretty interesting sleight of hand to get everything into law on that date. This committee stage is pretty important, and it has to be done by 31 March. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second interesting constitutional aspect of this committee stage debate is that when we debate Part 1, by convention, we get to have a fairly free-ranging discussion about fiscal policy and about tax rates, about the Government\u2019s structure of its tax system and what it is and isn\u2019t doing within its tax system, who it\u2019s working for, who it\u2019s not working for, the gaps in the system, and the things that could be done better in the system. It\u2019s where we also get to have a look at the tax rates that are set and discuss whether or not they are appropriate and they are meeting the Government\u2019s needs. It\u2019s the one time every year when we get to talk about the tax system in a holistic fashion, not just clause by clause by clause through an Act but in a holistic way talking about, I guess, the entirety of our tax system, so it\u2019s a debate that I would encourage every member of this House to participate in. It is actually important to us, constitutionally, and it\u2019s something that I hope I would see members from across the Chamber participating in with plenty to say. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHaving set that scene, for what we are doing in this Part 1\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228c4ecfc4addba40bdb7dc453da8bb0b1\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: Good scene setting\u2014good scene setting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227edd2e56d501dc1c98c8d95722a3c385\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Thank you, Megan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to focus on the nature of our income tax system in New Zealand. In New Zealand, we tax income, and we tax it through the Income Tax Act. We tax consumption of goods and services through the Goods and Services Tax Act. We have various other levies, which are taxed through their own Acts, and they\u2019re not unimportant; they\u2019re just not the focus of this particular debate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve actually got a fairly good income tax system. It\u2019s well-regarded worldwide. It\u2019s fairly clean. There are very few special rules in it giving special treatment to people. That\u2019s a rather helpful thing to have in a tax system. The more little special rules that are sitting there, the easier it is for people to circumvent the intent of the tax system. We don\u2019t want to have those special rules.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe problem with our income tax system, in some ways, is not so much what it does tax, as what it doesn\u2019t tax. As I said, it taxes income\u2014it taxes salary and wages. Every single penny that the cleaners who clean our offices earn is taxed on their wages. Every single penny that a supermarket checkout clerk earns is taxed. I was going to say that every single penny that a hard-working accountant earns is taxed, and that\u2019s going to be true if they\u2019re in a salaried job\u2014and it is almost certainly true because accountants are a bit too clever to go around playing jiggery-pokery. It\u2019s probably true of what people earn if they\u2019re working on a contract basis in an accounting firm. There are lots of people who pay income tax on every single penny they earn, and that would include most of us here in this Chamber\u2014in fact, I would think all of us. But there\u2019s a whole set of increases in value, whole sets of economic income, and whole sets of gains that people get that are not taxed. I\u2019m referring, over here, of course, to untaxed capital gains.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is actually a really worrying gap in our tax system. What it means is if you\u2019re earning income in a form that can be characterised as capital gains, then you\u2014I shouldn\u2019t refer to you, Mr Chair; I\u2019ll revise that wording. If a person can shift their income from being in the nature of salary and wages or sales coming into a business and so on\u2014that kind of taxed income\u2014and shift it into capital gains, then it is no longer taxed. They just have to re-characterise their income\u2014that\u2019s one way of doing it. Another way of ensuring that a person pays less tax on their economic income is to earn that economic income through the growth in value of untaxed assets. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA classic way we do that in this country is through rental properties. The structure of the way we\u2019ve taxed capital gains has actually encouraged people to invest in rental properties. It has encouraged people to invest in rental properties, which is unproductive investment. Sure, it provides a home, but if it was owner-occupied rather than rented out, there would still be a person living in it. It encourages people to say, \u201CActually, I won\u2019t put my money into a firm, into a business, or into a start-up and maybe earn a really good return off that.\u201D Because there is a tax advantage to rental properties, people put their money there, and they put it into unproductive investment. That\u2019s a real gap in our tax system. It\u2019s not just a gap in our tax system that distorts investment decisions; it\u2019s actually a deeply unfair problem in our tax system. It is deeply unfair because someone who sits on an asset and gets the value in it just out of it sitting there pays much less tax on their economic income than our cleaners, our baristas, our supermarket checkout clerks, and so on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPeople will say, of course, that rental property owners do pay tax on their rental properties. They earn rental income, and from that, they can deduct expenses, and they\u2019ll pay tax on the remaining balance. They\u2019re quite right; they do pay tax in that way on the ongoing income they earn from the rental property, which comes in every week or every fortnight or every month as rent from their tenant. What they do not pay tax on is on the unrealised gains\u2014on the gains in value of their rental properties. As of today, if you bought a rental property 20 years ago for $500,000 and you sold it today for maybe $1.2\u00A0million\u2014because that\u2019s the kind of increases we\u2019ve had in value over the last 20\u00A0years\u2014that $700,000 gain would be untaxed. It would be completely free in the seller\u2019s hands. That does seem to be unfair. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, if anyone was going to adjust the rules around this, of course you\u2019d do it on a forward-looking basis. You wouldn\u2019t go back to revisit decisions people made 20 years ago. It\u2019s nevertheless something we need to start paying attention to in our tax system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8172c232eab87fe16d4c09c60959f16\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll just say, at this stage, that I very much enjoyed the 101 on tax, and it was good context and background for what\u2019s to come. However, I did note that there weren\u2019t any questions or any interactions with the Minister through that, for which, of course, I remind members that we are actually in the committee of the whole House. What I\u2019ll be looking for is perhaps a little more interaction. I\u2019m aware it\u2019s wide-ranging, but it is a debate rather than a wide-ranging lecture, shall we say.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u00226cf3465624041d3e3a8e2756175a1c0e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226cf3465624041d3e3a8e2756175a1c0e\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (17:26)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. That\u2019s a very wise piece of advice that you\u2019ve given from the Chair, as always. I do also point out that there is a convention with this debate and with Part 1 of this debate\u2014and I think my colleague Deborah Russell made that very clear\u2014that this is the part of the bill that sets the tax rate for New Zealand. By convention, Part 1 has always been an opportunity for members of this Parliament to debate not only the tax rates but the policies that sit behind the various tax rates. I think it is important that this Parliament wouldn\u2019t deviate from that very long-held convention about Parliament having the chance to scrutinise the thinking that lies behind the tax rates, which are set out in a schedule specified in Part 1 of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227185cc19d3b4dd2c7e43261bca288db6\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: And debate in question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a3c8224b8223140144e72653d953407\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS\u003C/span\u003E: Absolutely. This is the committee of the whole House stage, and there will be questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things that we know in terms of the policy that sits behind this and that domestic advice that comes through both Inland Revenue and also the Treasury\u2014and I\u2019ll be asking the Minister of Revenue some questions around that. We also have, intersecting with this, some of the other advice that we\u2019ve had coming through in terms of the World Bank advice around New Zealand facing a structural deficit\u2014i.e., we\u2019re paying more in expenditure than we\u2019re collecting in Government revenue. This is baked into our fiscal path. Obviously, when there\u2019s a problem\u2014when you\u2019re spending more than you\u2019re taking in\u2014you\u2019ve got a choice: you can cut spending, or you can get more income. This is the policy decision that a Government faces.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, this is a Government that has chosen to decrease spending, and that\u2019s having a significant on health, homes, and jobs. We saw that with policy decisions that were made around interest deductibility for landlords. We\u2019ve also seen that the Government has chosen not to increase revenue. In the 2024 International Monetary Fund (IMF) report on the New Zealand economy, one of the things they talk about is that to achieve objectives, reform could combine comprehensive capital gains, land value tax, and changes to corporate income tax. It\u2019s not just international organisations like the IMF that are giving this advice; we\u2019ve seen our own Treasury here start to talk about the fact that we need to broaden the tax base and we should be considering a capital gains tax.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the questions I\u2019m putting to the Minister around Part 1 and the policy that lies behind those tax rates is: what thinking did the Minister give to revenue-raising measures when putting together these tax rates? What we\u2019re seeing is that this is very focused on income tax rates, this part. As my colleague the Hon Dr Deborah Russell pointed out, every cleaner that goes off and does their work has to pay their income tax, and every other worker in New Zealand has to pay their tax. What consideration, in terms of thinking about the revenue inside of the equation, did the Minister give to broadening that base and to thinking about taxing things other than income? If he didn\u2019t consider any advice on that, why did he not consider any advice on that, given that Treasury has been indicating that there are benefits to New Zealand in going down this path and broadening that tax base? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to know whether or not he has seen any of the advice that I suspect Treasury has been giving to the Minister of Finance; whether the Minister of Finance has been sharing that advice that Treasury has increasingly been putting through in terms of the revenue side of the equation and the kinds of ways in which we could broaden that tax base; any other policy work that the Minister asked for in the context of New Zealand having this spending more than we\u2019re bringing in equation; and what work the Minister has been doing from a policy perspective to think about how we even that up. I\u2019d be interested to hear from the Minister on those things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00224b619d5b15aaa093b552637f3d1f9551\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224b619d5b15aaa093b552637f3d1f9551\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (17:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, thanks very much, Mr Chair, and thanks for the opportunity to answer a question. Yeah, there\u2019s been a lot of consideration in regards to revenue methods. The primary method that we\u2019re focused on is growing our economy so that we can grow the revenue of every business and every household in this country. That\u2019s been a major focus of this Government, and one of the ways we achieve that is through a broad based - low rate tax system. I receive a wide range of advice from Treasury as part of my role.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u00221e0082d6a87dbed45077d55511219a9c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221e0082d6a87dbed45077d55511219a9c\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (17:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, thank you for your guidance as to this debate. It is an important one about the tax system and about tax rates; not just the detail of the actual tax rates\u2014and for good reason because it is the only time we debate it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to follow on from something that my colleague the Hon Dr Megan Woods has talked about, and that is whether Government is raising sufficient revenue. Now, we have seen\u2014and I think I have it written down here\u2014some words from the IMF report on the New Zealand economy from 2024. Quoting them, they say, \u201CNew Zealand would benefit from a more efficient, equitable, and sustainable tax system. New Zealand already has one of the most efficient goods and services tax systems globally.\u201D\u2014tick, which is great\u2014\u201CHowever, tax policy reforms are needed to promote investment, and productivity growth, increase the progressivity of income tax, and mobilize additional revenue in response to long-term fiscal challenges. To achieve these objectives, reforms should combine comprehensive capital gains tax, land value tax, and changes to corporate income tax.\u201D That\u2019s a pretty challenging set of taxes that the IMF has raised as something that we should be considering for our tax system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to talk about that need. It\u2019s been well documented by the IMF, by the World Bank, and by Treasury that New Zealand has a structural deficit, a baked-in deficit, between what is collected in Government revenue and what is baked in, in terms of spending or what spending projections are. Now, it\u2019s worth remembering that a lot of the spending in New Zealand is non-negotiable; it can\u2019t be changed. We actually need to spend on health, we need to spend on education, and we need to spend on welfare. This is what New Zealanders have told us we need to do as a Government since the 1930s. People talk about having bipartisanship across the aisle\u2014and there are things we agree on. The interesting one is this one: there is a great social compact in New Zealand around health and education and housing, and those systems all cost. That\u2019s the sort of baked-in spending we have that can\u2019t simply be cut and cut and cut or adjusted. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo we have this ongoing fiscal deficit, and the interesting thing is that there\u2019s a couple of things we can do to fix that structural deficit. One is we can cut, and the other one is we can try to increase Government revenue. Now, actually, probably a bit of both is in order. We always know that we can find ways to save, but, actually, even with doing that, we still need better sources of Government revenue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would like to understand from the Minister of Revenue to what extent he has considered where else he could raise revenue from. It\u2019s interesting that he\u2019s not the Minister of taxation, right? Taxation is very, very important, but it\u2019s not the only source of Government revenue; there are other ways to raise income for Government. It could be looking at royalties. It could be looking at investment. It could be looking at\u2014what else might the Government do? Actually, it\u2019s sometimes a wee bit hard to think, but they could\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223cc95d2ab959cab7d61a417de75007d5\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: Well, they sell things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228fd37dde7dc54bf795f019f1e499545f\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: They sell things. They can do that too. There are all sorts of things that Government could do. I want to know to what extent the Minister, who is charged with maintaining the revenue system, has considered these sorts of issues. That\u2019s a question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlongside that, it says we need a comprehensive capital gains tax. Now, the interesting thing is that there are some forms of capital gains sitting in the income tax system itself already. If we look at the land transfer rules, they\u2019re sitting in there; they\u2019re a form of capital gains tax. The brightline test is a form of a capital gains tax. The financial arrangements rules are a form of a capital gains tax. It might be interesting for the members of the Opposition to learn that the current foreign investment fund (FIF) rules are actually a wealth tax but that the proposed change in this bill of the revenue account method is actually a capital gains tax. There\u2019s quite a lot of stuff already sitting there which has a mix of capital gains through the income tax system. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis does create some problems because it means we\u2019ve got a real mishmash of rules sitting in there around what is capital and what is income and what gets taxed\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EBell rung\u003C/span\u003E] Mr Chair?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022301593843ef3b7af63dc3e3ea4c50d10\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Ms Russell can carry on, but she\u2019ll be moving quite quickly towards a question or some sort of interaction with the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bc054a53a72bd3bbeecd9adf7eee5987\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m asking the Minister to what extent the Minister has considered, instead of having all this mishmash of different rules sitting in the income tax system which are actually capital gains taxes\u2014whether he has considered getting rid of those rules and, instead of that, having a whole separate clean set of capital gains tax rules? Now, that would be quite a substantial reform to the income tax system. It would tidy up the quite creaky rules that are sitting in there. If you want to understand how creaky the rules are or how hard it is to adjust them, it is really looking at the FIF rules and the extent to which the Inland Revenue and the legislators have now tried to work the revenue account method rules backwards into the existing FIF rules. It\u2019s become more and more complex. Now, one way to deal with that kind of complexity would just be to have a comprehensive capital gains tax, so has the Minister considered that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of other forms of taxes that could increase the much-needed revenue base for New Zealand\u2014after all, gentlemen, roads don\u2019t grow on trees\u2014has he considered a land value tax? A land value tax would be a way of increasing some of the revenue that could come into the Government\u2019s accounts. It could be used very deliberately to fund some of the activities. Has the Minister considered perhaps using a land value tax? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, the interesting one in here is changes to corporate income tax. Now, the company tax rate is set at 28 percent. From what the IMF has said, I\u2019m assuming that they might favour an increase in the company tax rate. Now, that\u2019s interesting because often we get told that what we ought to be doing is, in fact, reducing the company tax rate because that would encourage more inwards investment into New Zealand. Now, that\u2019s a debatable point\u2014it\u2019s an empirical question as to whether or not that would actually happen\u2014but the interesting thing around that is that a couple of years ago, in 2022, in its long-term insights briefing, the Inland Revenue prepared a really good long-term insights briefing on looking at the extent to which New Zealand\u2019s tax rates hampered investment and productivity in this country. It was a really good briefing. It was deeply inconvenient to us as a Government at the time, but I\u2019m looking at it now and thinking, actually, it\u2019s really worth looking at. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d like to know from the Minister if, in setting the company tax rate for this year\u2014and the Minister has chosen to set it at 28 percent\u2014he has given any attention to that long-term insights briefing that Inland Revenue prepared in 2022 and has he picked up any of the ideas from it as ways to think about the corporate income tax rate and whether changing it in some fashion or changing some of the rules around that would actually increase investment into New Zealand and would increase productivity in New Zealand? Both are critical questions for our economy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00223420d61ccff7373c4874a972c807180b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223420d61ccff7373c4874a972c807180b\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (17:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Chair. If anyone wants to see the points of difference between the sides of the House, in regards to tax policy, one only needs to play back: has the Government considered a land value tax? No. Has the Government considered a capital gains tax? No. Has the Government considered a death tax? No. Has the Government considered a whole lot of taxes that one wants to make up off the cuff? No. We are a broad base - low rate party. We are not looking to increase tax. We are looking to increase economic growth, and that is the priority on this side of the Chamber.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhy have we not considered a capital gains tax? Well, we don\u2019t want to tax capital, because of the surprising fact that capital assists us to grow our economy. If you tax capital, you do not grow your economy. I will leave it at that, but I don\u2019t think one needs a lecture around whether we are considering more tax on this side of the Chamber. The answer is no. We are focused on growing our economy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regard to the corporate tax rate, yes, we did consider, as part of the assessment when we put in place Investment Boost, whether we would be better to reduce the corporate tax rate or do another alternative. We selected to do Investment Boost, because Investment Boost is a targeted mechanism in order to ensure that the benefit goes to those who most need it. We are a party and a Government of fiscal discipline. We think about where we spend taxpayer money\u2014because it\u2019s not our money; it\u2019s taxpayer money\u2014and the Investment Boost was the most targeted way to achieve that and deliver economic growth. I am very comfortable that we have made prudent and fiscally disciplined decisions when we\u2019ve made policy decisions around our tax. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u0022c1dce667b63689385b823ff7a34ba174\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c1dce667b63689385b823ff7a34ba174\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (17:41)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I know my colleague the Hon Dr Deborah Russell has a very sharp follow-up question to the Minister of Revenue\u2019s contribution.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are two things that I\u2019m interested in learning about from the Minister around this, because, of course, as well as the company tax rate, within this, the trustee tax rate is also set, and that is at 39\u00A0percent. Now, I wouldn\u2019t dare to delve into the changes to the disclosure rules around trusts that are further on in the bill\u2014that will be for much later in this Wednesday, whenever this Wednesday stretches to\u2014but what I do want to know, in this part of the bill, around the rate is whether or not there was any consideration, alongside those changes to the disclosure rules around the trustee tax rate, whether or not the Government looked at either raising that or lowering that, and where, within the whole system, they thought that should sit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, as my colleague Dr Deborah Russell identified, this is the Minister of Revenue, not the Minister of taxation. This is about where you balance up how much money the Government\u2019s bringing in against the programme of work that they want to spend it on. So one of the things I would like to know is about whether or not the Minister of Revenue was considering what revenue might come in from asset sales and whether or not there would be revenue that would come into that side of the Government ledger from that way. I\u2019m also interested to learn, from the Minister sitting in the chair\u2014when he ruled out the taxes that the Government had ruled out, he, of course, didn\u2019t list a gas tax, which the Government has gone on to implement\u2014whether or not that levy was considered on the revenue side of the equation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u00222f3be82958310ef238d6facd020de499\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222f3be82958310ef238d6facd020de499\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (17:43)\u003C/span\u003E: I want to pick up on a couple of things that the Minister of Revenue has mentioned in his response just now, and they\u2019re quite important. We\u2019ve been challenging the Minister on various taxes and asking him why we didn\u2019t have a capital gains tax, and the Minister asserted that we have a broad based - low rate tax system. That\u2019s what he believes, and, I guess, in some ways, looking at the income tax rates we pay, they are comparatively low compared to other jurisdictions. Our top income tax rate sits in at 39 percent. I believe that, in Australia, the top income tax rate is 45\u00A0percent. They, of course, have a different tax scale from us. At the bottom of their tax scale, they have a tax-free band, and so, with the way it works out, it probably all comes out in the wash. Nevertheless, we have a broad based - low rate tax system, the Minister said.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe problem is that that\u2019s just not correct. It\u2019s simply not correct. I agree that the rates are on the low side\u2014they\u2019re not the lowest, by any means, but by no means are they the highest, either\u2014and the point of having lower rates is that\u2014I guess Ronald Reagan believed in this, didn\u2019t he?\u2014if you lower the tax rates, people just pay their taxes, instead of looking for every way to avoid them. Mr Chair, I know that you and I will remember the days of the 66 percent tax rates, and, when those were lowered, actually, the income tax rate collection rate went up in New Zealand. Yes, we do have lower rates now, but we do not have a broad base. I think it\u2019s just not correct to claim that we have a broad-base tax system. Now, we\u2019ve got a pretty good GST system, which is very broad; it covers virtually everything, so that consumption tax, I think, is a pretty good consumption tax. As I said before, the Income Tax Act\u2014the income tax itself\u2014is actually a reasonably clean income tax, but the problem is that it\u2019s not so much what the income tax applies to; it\u2019s what it\u2019s not applied to. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the Minister asserted that we have a broad based - low rate tax, but I do not see how that can be consistent with his assertion that we should not have capital gains. If we\u2019re not taxing capital gains, it is not a broad-base system, so I\u2019m just going to invite the Minister to walk that one back. We have a low-rate system; we do not have a broad-base system. That\u2019s kind of a contradiction there, so I\u2019m going to ask the Minister to say how he reconciles that broad based - low rate\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3e3fe4d13ec02f0ad992113c3cc484a\u0022\u003ERyan Hamilton\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order, Mr Chair. Mr Chair, I know it\u2019s well within your remit to discern that I\u2019m not challenging the scope, but I am questioning, unless the member has an amendment she\u2019s speaking to, she\u2019s not even asking a question related to Part 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e874582ec70e926c08ec4eaaa91e7723\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: This is a broad-based part of the bill, but, also, I would invite those on my right to wonder, if they play any sport, whether their trying to influence the referee really does help with the decision making in the end or whether they\u2019re probably best to leave it to the referee and not risk, probably, a perverse outcome to what they are actually seeking.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002245b973347df49dc0546afde53fbf4123\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. That\u2019s the first challenge\u2014a lack of capital gains versus broad based - low rate. I\u2019d like to know how the Minister reconciles that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, the Minister talked about\u2014and he brought this into the debate at this stage\u2014their immediate write-off tax policy, their accelerated depreciation rate. It\u2019s the policy they brought in on Budget night, whereby firms that invested in a new asset could get an immediate write-off of 20 percent. That has great cash-flow impacts. No one ends up paying any more or less tax; it\u2019s just got a really good cash-flow impact. He said that Investment Boost has been a \u201Creal success\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe problem is, I\u2019d like to know how he knows that. There\u2019s no data\u2014there is no data as yet\u2014so it\u2019s a very real question to the Minister: how can he make that claim? Now, I know there are anecdotes\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252067478ee0200f315183368318e62ec\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: Anecdata.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296776dbfd73fb4f41c1c2c7519061e65\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014anecdata, and I know that there has been a pretty small survey done by the Inland Revenue Department to say that Investment Boost is being used\u2014Mr Chair! Mr Chair!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d868eaa4a7274b56fe0c3e284b17661\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Deborah Russell. Again, Ms Russell, we are still looking for some fairly pointed points.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd3b627c6dbf7328a9e708eecc24485d\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Here comes the pointed question, I promise you, Mr Chair. Here is the thing: we have assertions and anecdotes, we have a survey, but the Minister said that Investment Boost has been a success. I want to know what the Minister is basing that on. We know that the Inland Revenue Department hasn\u2019t collected the data yet, because the income tax year hasn\u2019t ended, so there is no data available from the Inland Revenue Department. On what grounds can the Minister say that that policy is a success, unless lots of people have just been saying, \u201COh, it\u2019s very successful. Oh, it\u2019s very successful.\u201D? That\u2019s no measure of success. I\u2019d like to invite the Minister to just give us some evidence as to why he thinks that Investment Boost has been a success.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022f1765994e39500b640ae33aa65200867\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f1765994e39500b640ae33aa65200867\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (17:49)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, thanks, again, for the second question in regards to this committee of the whole House. The answer in regards to asset sales is no. The Government has not considered that and is not considering that at this point. The context in the question around Investment Boost\u2014again, it provides a targeted intervention which, in effect, has an overarching effect to reduce the broader rate of tax that businesses pay, which is important.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMore broadly, in regards to the question around capital gains tax, the member will be aware that New Zealand has a brightline test that is for individuals that, in effect, have residential property, that look to build and sell that within a two-year period. They are subject to tax. That is already in the law. We don\u2019t have a policy to tax people\u2019s homes. We don\u2019t have a policy to tax people\u2019s farms or their baches\u2014I appreciate the member is keen to do all that or have a 66 percent tax rate, which seems to be on the agenda; we\u2019re not doing any of that. The context of our focus is on making sure that we are broad based - low rate, to encourage economic growth.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b618b847a57b4afb94b76eaea9e042a5\u0022 data-id=\u0022915d99984360125a61778f29077e97aa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b618b847a57b4afb94b76eaea9e042a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022915d99984360125a61778f29077e97aa\u0022\u003EDr CARLOS CHEUNG (National\u2014Mt Roskill) (17:50)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022 data-id=\u00225e4a872d699bc508edcffc2668973aa4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225e4a872d699bc508edcffc2668973aa4\u0022\u003EFRANCISCO HERNANDEZ (Green) (17:51)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I just want to quickly check: is Schedule 1 covered in Part 1 of the debate? Part 1 makes references to Schedule 1 of the Income Tax Act. Before I proceed with the questions that I wanted to ask, I just wanted to check that point; otherwise I\u2019ll do a general, broader\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022435e1bf7e7622d35b965ad56992e4ce9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: No, it\u2019s not in this. When we\u2019re talking about Schedule 1, we\u2019re talking Schedule 1 of the Income Tax Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ad51703d36e533c7dba863bdccffcec\u0022\u003EHon Members: \u003C/span\u003EMr Chair!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a9eb1f596ec8bedd6a50db48f0ede120\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Megan Woods.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240f542650f012596e21cb9d24a416f1d\u0022\u003EFRANCISCO HERNANDEZ\u003C/span\u003E: So my question\u2019s\u2014sorry, I believe I still have the\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022430ee102012714b4b78ca5b8414bda23\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: Sorry, I think my colleague still would like to continue to talk. I\u2019ll take my call after him.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0145e85120231d6d6d453722799af7f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, sorry. Carry on, Francisco Hernandez.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002207b6b9af83afebdcf58b72fc4c6fbdbc\u0022\u003EFRANCISCO HERNANDEZ\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Now that I know that it doesn\u2019t reflect Schedule 1, I\u2019ll keep my points and questions broader based in keeping with your instruction that this part of the debate is necessarily broader than previous parts. I think when we do get to Part 2, I\u2019m really looking forward to the clause by clause debate around it, and I\u2019m looking forward to the many amendments that we\u2019ll draft around this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question is around the imposition of the income tax rate. We know in the statements that the Minister of Revenue has made in the introduction that the Minister wants to realise a broad-based system with fiscal responsibility. We know that there will be an Amendment Paper that gives tax discounts. Has there been any consideration done to, essentially, raising the tax rate of the top income bracket to make sure that the changes the Government is making don\u2019t lead to any kind of changes in the operating allowance? We know that it\u2019s going to cost them $373 million out of the existing operation allowance, which only has $1 billion, I believe, left, out of the original $2.4 billion. I think that\u2019s really significant because that $1 billion is expected to cover not only inflation costs but any potential additional spending that might come.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI was wondering whether there is also scope in the annual rates of income tax, besides raising the potential top tax rate for this bracket. Is there scope in Part 3, in the income taxes that it\u2019s amending, to potentially put on super levies, in addition to the top bracket, for example? Is there scope in this part, in section BB\u00A01 of the Income Tax Act, to further create new top tax brackets at the very top? Conversely\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002243a3ec16d19c627af1f57472a7af3e23\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: That is in Part 2. Any amendments to the actual tax rates will be dealt with in Part 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a20f8d64c77888f0468378ecbe825ed2\u0022\u003EFRANCISCO HERNANDEZ\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not covered in BB\u00A01, with the schedule?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022742a9ab6eeb7caaa0e217cc392e48e67\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: About setting of the tax rate, yes. Carry on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223cf566b82356374594ac1781b0237d0b\u0022\u003EFRANCISCO HERNANDEZ\u003C/span\u003E: OK, so it is relevant. OK. Cool.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb3ba92a33274c22c945b283c9ff4fe2\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Just the actual rates themselves.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226cfbdf1695a97d0fdcf87fee2dc51b99\u0022\u003EFRANCISCO HERNANDEZ\u003C/span\u003E: OK, yes. I\u2019m talking about the actual rates.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy other suggestion is that it\u2019s been a longstanding, I guess, anomaly of the New Zealand tax system that we don\u2019t have a tax-free threshold bracket. Other countries, like the UK, have it\u2014I believe they\u2019ve got it set at \u00A314,000. I feel that amending section BB\u00A01 to introduce a tax-free income bracket would be a really good way to deliver immediate, quick, targeted relief for families. I think that\u2019s actually one of the core components of the Green Budget: we ask for a tax-free threshold. I feel like that would really capture some of the low income and it would deliver that in quite a targeted way. Now, of course, it would capture some people in the top income tax bracket as well, but combined with the suggestions that I made earlier to introduce potentially the tax rates on the existing top tax rate\u2014bring that up\u2014and also the other one which is to potentially create some new tax brackets higher up the bracket.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust to reiterate, the three suggestions that I had were a new top tax income bracket, raising the existing top tax bracket, and also potentially creating a tax-free threshold as a way to create immediate and good relief for New Zealanders as we go through this fuel crisis. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00227569c5691859408f02f9d08a977270cc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227569c5691859408f02f9d08a977270cc\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (17:55)\u003C/span\u003E: No. Quite simply, the Government is not considering increasing taxes for hard-working Kiwis; quite the opposite. We\u2019re wanting to create a broad based - low rate tax system to encourage economic growth.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8795726b12c8847d1288c9df3d46656\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the time has come for me to leave the Chair for the dinner break. The committee is suspended until 7.30 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 5.56 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a64507dd6147be245a0bceb8422bd46d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, before the dinner break, we were debating Part 1 of the bill. This is the debate on the \u201CAnnual rates of income tax\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u0022261cacef1f2f3103aaeb323b32eb61f2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022261cacef1f2f3103aaeb323b32eb61f2\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (19:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I was just thinking about where we were at before the dinner break. We\u2019re on Part 1, where we\u2019re talking about the rates of income tax and the revenue side of it but also the policy decisions that sit behind it there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI may be mistaken but, from my recollection, the Minister of Revenue has yet to answer my question about trusts and whether or not there was any policy thinking around the rate of taxation applied to trusts, given that there were some quite major changes in other parts of the bill\u2014and we\u2019ll come to that when we get to those parts. Given that there were some other major changes around the disclosure laws, I would ask whether there has been any thinking about changing the 39\u00A0percent trusts rate and whether or not that was done there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing is that the Minister introduced into the debate in his contribution the idea that we have this broad-based tax system in play. One of the things that I was sitting here thinking about was that it would be really good for us to know, in the committee stage, whether he has looked at international comparators as to whether or not New Zealand really did have this broad-based tax base, and, if so, what those international comparators were that he looked at and that he might compare us to. We can see there that we have rates at 10.5 percent up to $15,600, and then the rate at $180,001 and above is 39c in the dollar. How does this compare to other tax jurisdictions, and particularly OECD tax jurisdictions, that we would normally compare ourselves to? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other question is in terms of the other forms of revenue that were considered. I\u2019ve asked the Minister about that because, of course, in Part 1, this is a broad and reasonably free-ranging debate around the policy. I mean, when we\u2019re thinking about where to set the tax rates, it\u2019s always a trade-off between other forms of revenue that a Government might be able to bring in, and so, for example, I asked the Minister whether he thought about selling things off and whether that was something that came into his thinking. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220fe7508c7b8a47378c4c88fe1ce69fcb\u0022 data-id=\u0022eccca4999e49e80c48dcee35731b6534\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220fe7508c7b8a47378c4c88fe1ce69fcb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022eccca4999e49e80c48dcee35731b6534\u0022\u003ECUSHLA TANGAERE-MANUEL (Labour\u2014Ikaroa-R\u0101whiti) (19:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. \u003Cspan lang=\u0022mi\u0022\u003ET\u0113n\u0101 koe e te Minita\u003C/span\u003E. I just want to pick up on some of the k\u014Drero that follows on from my contribution to the Budget Policy Statement debate earlier, and I want to start with the M\u0101ori authorities\u2019 tax rate and about maintaining that. On the surface, that will provide some stability for M\u0101ori authorities, who, as we know, often deal with multiple-owned land and multiple-owned assets, which already make it harder to create a profit, and while that may provide some predictability, has any thought been given to targeted incentives for further development and growth for M\u0101ori authorities? Also, while we\u2019re talking about that, given the significant contribution that the M\u0101ori economy makes to the growth of this country and the contribution that it makes to the GDP of this country, was there any meaningful consultation with iwi, hap\u016B, or M\u0101ori businesses around this bill?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000610\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFurthermore, we know that M\u0101ori households are more likely to be in the lower to middle income earning ranges and that M\u0101ori are highly represented in sectors severely affected by cost of living increases. What other considerations, in terms of targeted taxes etc., were given to support not just M\u0101ori businesses but M\u0101ori workers who may be impacted by tax bracket creep? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat, if any, targeted consideration was made to support the growth of M\u0101ori authorities? Also there has been some discussion around Investment Boost and the positive initiative that that is for business. Often, e te Minita, a lot of M\u0101ori-owned businesses are small businesses, and, therefore, they don\u2019t have the capital to invest in new assets. What, if any, consideration has been given to support them? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000612\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002243a6e280f9cf4d2fbeda4d4e860d0dd3\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000613\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022945808f024340dcecc68c05445c79a7e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000614\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8dadcdac42b6de944975c0c222da83e\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: No, no\u2014Mr Chair!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000615\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222945653a0ee39376f9c514e36557191\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: You just made it, Dr Woods.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u002247f528e2965a1a9a5e6e50c62a3f5c9f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000616\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002247f528e2965a1a9a5e6e50c62a3f5c9f\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (19:35)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m just reminding the Minister of Revenue that there are still some unanswered questions in this part. The trusts rate is a question that I am interested in. I\u2019m going to have no other opportunity at any point in this bill to ask the Minister about the policy considerations that meant that the trusts rate is at 39c, given that we have had some quite major changes to other bits of the trusts law, and also there were the other revenue measures that were considered by the Minister in bringing this together.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000617\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI think that it is important. We\u2019re going to come to some quite fundamental changes that are happening in the tax system through this amendment bill. I would ask the Minister to use this opportunity in this very broad-ranging debate that we have around Part 1 to answer those questions, and these are live questions that are sitting on the table for the Minister. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022413f9014ec6c2831cbd4b469c08668db\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000618\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022413f9014ec6c2831cbd4b469c08668db\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (19:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Chair. Just in regard to some of the questions on M\u0101ori authorities and consultations, the Finance and Expenditure Committee did a wide range of consultation, including with iwi M\u0101ori organisations. That input is part of that process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000619\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWith regard to the Investment Boost product, one of the questions was with regard to how the tax incentive models that we\u2019ve done benefit M\u0101ori businesses. Obviously, Investment Boost applies to all businesses in New Zealand, including M\u0101ori businesses, irrespective of size\u2014I think the member Cushla Tangaere-Manuel asked about the size of businesses and their ability to have capital etc. Well, that applies to, say, a sole trader who is a plumber, for example, right through to large, corporate businesses, and of course that applies to everyone within the broader economy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000620\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EEarlier this evening, I answered the question around asset sales. The Government has no plan to undertake asset sales. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000621\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere was another question in regard to a comparison of where we sit versus international peers. There\u2019s good literature on the context of benchmarking around where New Zealand sits against other international players. Our GST model is considered to be one of the leading consumption tax models in the world because of its low level of exemptions, and when you take into account Investment Boost in conjunction with our corporate tax rate, our effective rate for corporate taxation is very much aligned with the OECD average. Thank you. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u00223374c6bcee037ea14c2ff4a97551a013\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000622\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223374c6bcee037ea14c2ff4a97551a013\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (19:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I do want to assert another line of questioning for the Minister of Revenue, just in respect of attempts to ensure that New Zealand has sufficient revenue to pay for the things that New Zealanders, over many generations, have expressed that they want\u2014health, welfare, education, and so on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000623\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELook, one of the substantial changes that has happened around income tax since the current Government came into power has been a whole lot of changes that have renewed the tax preference for residential rental properties. Amongst other things, the current Government has changed the brightline test from a 10-year brightline test to a two-year brightline test. It has put back in place full interest deductibility for rental properties, even when a large part of the interest expense is actually related to the untaxed capital gain on rental properties, rather than on the current income earned by rental properties, and that cost has made a substantial hole in the Budget. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000624\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe note that the Minister of Finance, even under her ridiculous operating balance before gains and losses, excluding ACC revenue and expenses measure, is still continuing to run losses for many years, and so what it does bring to mind is whether the Minister considered reversing the reversal of those changes. At any stage in his consideration of this bill, did he consider putting back in place an extended brightline period, which would have removed at least some of the tax preference for residential rental property? Did he consider revisiting the interest deductibility rule, and, even if he didn\u2019t want to go as far as the previous Government did and remove interest deductibility entirely, given that in order for an expense to be deductible, it must be associated with assessable income\u2014and, of course, a large part of the income on residential rental properties is not assessable because it\u2019s untaxed capital gains\u2014did he consider maybe doing a fifty-fifty on interest deductibility? Both those measures would have reintroduced a bit of revenue to the Crown accounts. It would have helped to reduce the deficit faster. It would have meant that perhaps the Minister of Finance didn\u2019t have to increase borrowing. She\u2019s borrowed more than we ever did in the short two years she\u2019s been in office, so they feel like a very long two years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000625\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to know what consideration the Minister gave, if anything, to actually trying to boost the amount of revenue that the Crown earns by removing some of the tax preferences around residential rental properties.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022 data-id=\u00225e54d9f0b394e01900ecdd37b1149532\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000626\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022eb80a9df83044b88a00c174ea7a61925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225e54d9f0b394e01900ecdd37b1149532\u0022\u003ETANGI UTIKERE (Labour\u2014Palmerston North) (19:40)\u003C/span\u003E: Kia orana, Mr Chair. It\u2019s a pleasure to take a call on the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2025-26, Compliance Simplification, and Remedial Measures) Bill. I understand that we\u2019re on Part 1. This is the first chance I\u2019ve had to ask the Minister of Revenue some questions around this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000627\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1, as I understand it, looks to identify what those basic rates are when it comes to income tax. One of the responsibilities that I have is the Labour Party spokesperson for transport, so, to me, this is about setting the rates by which the money would come into the Government coffers and about, basically, the prioritisation process that the Government would have. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000628\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, obviously, when it comes to the rates that are set by this particular bill, that would determine how much in terms of income tax is paid, effectively, and the Government then has available to its disposal to utilise. When I look at the rates that are contained, as I understand it, in the schedule, the ranges are there. My question for the Minister, firstly, is: given that his own colleague Chris Bishop has indicated in the transport space that there is a significant deficit in terms of an ability to be able to fund what the Government\u2019s transport priorities and budget are, is he satisfied that the rates that are sat within the current ranges identified in this particular schedule, referenced by Part 1, are appropriate to meet that need? This is relevant because transport is a key area of the Government\u2019s expenditure, and income tax that is generated through these specific bands and rates in the schedule are part of the way in which the Government can receive income to be able to undertake its expenditure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000629\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, there will be many options, not just in terms of transport and the roads of National Party significance but if we look at school buses and the inability of the Government to be able to provide revenue to perhaps meet all of the needs for school buses\u2014and those are just two examples in portfolio areas that do make a real difference to communities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000630\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo the question to the Minister is: has he considered or did he seek any advice around the shortfalls specifically in the area of transportation projects and the ability for the Government to be able to meet those particular needs in order to determine that the rates that were set, as contained in those tax thresholds, were appropriate, or would he be open to suggesting any changes in that particular space; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00229922b5922dc3b02f24cba20c46cadc34\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229922b5922dc3b02f24cba20c46cadc34\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (19:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks very much for those questions. Earlier on, we had some questions around the trust tax rate. The member will be aware that there is a trust tax rate of 33 percent for trustee income of a threshold of $10,000 or less. That was put in play a number of periods ago.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to M\u0101ori authorities, again, the tax rate there is 17.5 percent. It reflects the income earned by most M\u0101ori authority members, the equivalent rate, and the M\u0101ori authorities are also on the tax programme for the broader Government to consider.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regards to capital gains, there was no consideration of capital gains tax and no consideration of taxing people\u2019s homes or other assets of that regard. We have a brightline test which deals with that, as has already been answered in questions earlier. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo the points around transport, obviously, the Minister of Transport is actively looking at ensuring that we have appropriate funding to undertake the broad range of transport projects required to drive economic growth.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b52eff5aa2a94fcc88903b73d0443de3\u0022 data-id=\u0022e4f894f5e81720e64d9a86e6d56f3426\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b52eff5aa2a94fcc88903b73d0443de3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e4f894f5e81720e64d9a86e6d56f3426\u0022\u003ENANCY LU (National) (19:44)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002259f7a2245140cb93309cbf0b1eecfb85\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002259f7a2245140cb93309cbf0b1eecfb85\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. There are two areas I want to check with the Minister of Revenue. Of course, in this case, we\u2019re referring to the Income Tax Act 2004, but specifically Schedule 1 of that. I think one of the questions I want to check with the Minister\u2014and thank you, Chair. I do understand that this is my first call for this particular part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things that we discussed, Minister, during the second reading, actually, was a comment made by Dr David Wilson. It was around the difference between tax base and tax rate. I think that was a really worthwhile conversation to be had. I think one of the things that was suggested there is that you do catch more with honey than with vinegar in terms of tax rates and that the higher tax rate doesn\u2019t necessarily mean more coming in. But, I guess, in the context of Part 1\u2014and so I\u2019m looking specifically at Part 1\u2014\u201CAnnual rates of income tax\u201D, one of the things that we have seen that was really successful overseas and particularly in Australia is having a tax-free threshold. That has been something that, proportionately speaking, balances out in a way that benefits people who are on lower income, more than people who are on higher incomes. I wonder if that has been a consideration when it comes to Part 1 of this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut I think, also moving on in terms of when we\u2019re looking at income tax around superannuation, which I believe is section 10 of Schedule 1 of the principal Act, it\u2019s also important to note that, as we\u2019re seeing with the annual income tax rate, seniors have been hit particularly hard when it comes to any of the changes and particularly what we see in terms of cost of living. Has there been any consideration around adjustments to the tax rate for the Superannuation Fund, in particular, to relieve seniors in terms of some of that particular entitlement? Those are my two questions for the time being. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00223d855e17b56173c5fc97535465f306c8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223d855e17b56173c5fc97535465f306c8\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (19:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Just in regards to the question around the tax-free threshold, no, we haven\u2019t considered that. The primary reason is that while that mechanism is in play in some jurisdictions overseas, it is not targeted. What I mean by that is that individuals on high incomes will also get the tax benefit of, in effect, paying no tax at a band of zero income to whatever the threshold is set. Therefore, our view is that having a broad based - low rate approach ensures that there is appropriate coverage for all taxpayers to ensure that they pay their reasonable amount of taxation revenue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00220f4e6b2231b7d165e413682d0901c9dd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220f4e6b2231b7d165e413682d0901c9dd\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (19:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I really appreciate that response from the Minister of Revenue. But considering we do have a progressive tax rate, one would assume that, regardless of how high your income becomes, you\u2019re always going to have the bottom tier, and you\u2019re always going to have the benefit of that lower tax bracket.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ETherefore, if you do introduce a tax-free threshold, it\u2019s the same thing with what we have now in Table 1 of section 1 of Schedule 1 of the Income Tax Act 2007. People who are on a higher income will still enjoy that 10.5 percent between $0 to $15,000. It will be no different than if they enjoy that as a tax-free threshold, but, of course, if you change some of the tax settings in a way that the higher tax threshold might be adjusted, it actually\u2014again, proportionally, as we see working in Australia, people who are on a lower income actually get more in their pocket than people on higher income. Then I just want to check with the Minister in terms of that clarification and also my other question regarding superannuation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002225c89b9f808350610e18980fafc98b9b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002225c89b9f808350610e18980fafc98b9b\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (19:48)\u003C/span\u003E: The member Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan raises an interesting point, but it\u2019s important not to compare different countries like for like in the taxation system. The other element of consideration is the broad base of the welfare system in which New Zealand also operates in conjunction with our tax system. You have to look at those two parts in a totality of a system and the benefits that that provides through to individuals. One can\u2019t look in isolation at the tax system versus other jurisdictions without considering the other aspects such as welfare.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022 data-id=\u0022a2be37e3fdf2f5d46c87bc7636e2a141\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a2be37e3fdf2f5d46c87bc7636e2a141\u0022\u003EMILES ANDERSON (National\u2014Waitaki) (19:49)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Part 1 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00221ce0da198e2ccb8bf1d96b72810db168\u0022\u003ECommittee of the Whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022246faa946817e746af5308afac265921\u0022\u003EPart 2 Amendments to Income Tax Act 2007, and Part A of Schedule 1\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002286e49a663505c94c833138b8cce713bf\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to Part 2. It\u2019s the debate on clauses 4 to 106\u2014\u201CAmendments to Income Tax Act 2007\u201D\u2014and Part A of Schedule 1. The question is that Part 2 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u00221949095a897c7ddd27311715d9fc30b6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221949095a897c7ddd27311715d9fc30b6\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (19:51)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just setting out what this particular part deals with: amongst other things, digital nomads, the RAM\u2014revenue account method\u2014for foreign investment fund rules, some new rules for employee share schemes, some rules around the income for the sale of excess electricity, and then a couple of Amendment Papers.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe Minister of Revenue\u2019s Amendment Paper 559 deals with a number of issues, some of which are in this part. For this part of the bill, the Amendment Paper covers some rules for new water organisations, and it also, importantly, I think, covers some really interesting new rules around thin capitalisation. So we do want to discuss those in reasonable detail because they have not been discussed at the Finance and Expenditure Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other Amendment Paper will come into our discussion once we get to around about clause 79 of the bill. It is an Amendment Paper which puts in place the measures needed for the policy that the Government announced yesterday around increasing the amount of money that some families can receive under the in-work tax credit to help with some of the cost of living issues at the moment, particularly precipitated by fuel prices.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo there\u2019s a whole lot of stuff to work through. We will want to spend quite a bit of time on that last Amendment Paper because it\u2019s quite a significant Government policy. Even though the actual tax changes are minimal, I think there is no other place to discuss the Government policy except here. So we will want to do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHowever, as is our usual practice, we want to move through this bill quite carefully, clause by clause. It\u2019s a complicated bill, in some ways, with clauses that amend, obviously, a number of differing main Acts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I want to start with is in Part 2, clause 5B. As far as I can tell, it changes the way that an asset is depreciated if a taxpayer has claimed Investment Boost but then has changed the way the asset is used. So it\u2019s gone from partial use in a business to full use in a business or from full use in a business to partial use in a business. The obvious example of an asset that would function like that might be a vehicle\u2014would be an obvious one for that sort of thing to happen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe first question there, though, is that this is an entire rewrite of section CC 15. So it\u2019s quite a substantive change to the Investment Boost rules. I guess that\u2019s, in part, because\u2014I mean, it\u2019s unsurprising we get these big changes in Budget night legislation; not everything is perfect the first time through, and it does need to be worked on. But I do want to understand why you did need to do that entire rewrite of the section. In particular, I want to understand why it needed to happen. But I looked at the replacement CC 15(1)(c), and it says, \u201Cthe change of use means the amount of the deduction the person would have been allowed under section DI 5 if the section were applied as if the income year were the income year in which the change of use occurs is less than the deducted DI 5 amount.\u201D I feel like saying, \u201CAnd in English, that says what?\u201D So I wonder if the Minister could just disentangle exactly what that replacement section CC 15(1)(c) actually means, because it is quite confusing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust one other question\u2014Mr Chair, I will request an extra call, but I won\u2019t take the full amount of time, I promise, just to make sure I get there, but I just want to deal with this bit here. I\u2019m looking at the change of use. It says, \u201CWhen this section does not apply:\u201D, and it says this section doesn\u2019t apply, so you don\u2019t have to change around all the stuff in the accounts and in this that and the other, when there\u2019s \u201Cless than [a] 25% change in use\u201D. I can see the formula there, and the formula does seem to work. What I\u2019m interested in is: why a 25 percent change in use? Why not a 33 percent change in use? Why not a 20 percent change in use? Why not a 50 percent change in use? I\u2019m hoping that there\u2019s more to it than someone just sticking their finger in the air and saying, \u201C25\u00A0percent.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf the Minister could just clarify those questions around clause 5B of the bill. Mr Chair, I didn\u2019t need the extra call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u002264162e347d0d49fbf70d96888f6338f7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002264162e347d0d49fbf70d96888f6338f7\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (19:56)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks to the member the Hon Dr Deborah Russell for the question in regards to clause 5B. This is a clawback of Investment Boost deduction following a change of use. This was actually something that the Finance and Expenditure Committee discussed in response to officials\u2019 feedback, and made a change which is reflected in the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere was a question around why there was a rewrite. In effect, the rewrite was undertaken to provide greater clarification in regards to the way in which this section was drafted. The push of the change, primarily, is, and probably the best example is to think about a commercial building\u2014for example, serviced apartments\u2014that can be easily converted to dwellings, and that\u2019s an example that the member\u2019s referring to around what you\u2019d see as a change of use.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe proportionality is 25 percent because that\u2019s the\u2014or more, which is important because that\u2019s considered to be what would be a material change of use, based on the feedback from officials.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022c8f05722b73792929cca2c3c4a70b802\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c8f05722b73792929cca2c3c4a70b802\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (19:57)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m just going to want to stick with that materiality thought for just a moment. Back in my auditing days\u2014long gone, thank goodness\u2014something which had made less than a 5 percent difference was deemed to be immaterial, something over 10 percent was deemed to be material, and in between was the judgment zone. So that materiality of 25 percent seems a little high, to me. I just wonder if the officials did any fiscal analysis into that or any modelling of what the actual fiscal impact of that would be, because that could make quite a difference there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EJust for the Minister in the chair, the Hon Chris Penk, we\u2019re talking about the materiality. Again, 25\u00A0percent was deemed to be the material level, but, as I said, that just doesn\u2019t quite stack up with the sorts of definitions of \u201Cmateriality\u201D we might have in other spaces. I\u2019d like to know whether there are other places in the Income Tax Act which have different levels of materiality. One of the nice things we can get, from time to time, is a little bit of consistency. Just if we could have a wee bit more on why 25 percent is deemed to be the material level.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022 data-id=\u0022842b3004ebef80e30d9f4fe5c78990c0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022842b3004ebef80e30d9f4fe5c78990c0\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS PENK (Minister for Building and Construction) (19:58)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Good evening to members of the committee of the whole House. I thank the Hon Dr Deborah Russell for her contributions, including those which I was able to catch on Parliament TV prior to relieving my colleague and friend the Hon Simon Watts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI understand that 25 percent is considered a reasonable threshold that would remove compliance costs where there was a small change in use. While reasonable minds can disagree to where one draws the line, of course it\u2019s necessary to draw the line somewhere, and it was felt that that was a reasonable threshold at which to introduce that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u002217451acdc5d985a8c4c9bf413377aca1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002217451acdc5d985a8c4c9bf413377aca1\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (19:59)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, thank you. I think the Ministers in the chair have adequately answered the questions that I had there around clause 5B, so thank you very much for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe next set of questions that I wanted to move on to were in clause 7. Clause 6 we\u2019ll deal with later on when we get to discussing the revenue account method and the foreign investment fund. Clause 7\u2014and this is going to relate to some of the discussion we had in Part 1\u2014is to do with capital distribution amounts and it says in the formula that we\u2019re replacing capital gains with net capital amount and deleting capital losses. It\u2019s a deeply confusing thing. I just want to ask a question here: does this mean that we actually have capital gains taxes in the tax law already? Is this yet another example of\u2014something I referred to in Part 1\u2014the confusing morass of capital gains taxes which actually do exist already in our income tax law, or is there just something I\u2019m missing here? If you could just clarify that, whether or not we are actually talking about some form of capital gains tax here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022 data-id=\u0022ea8526866f2da739a67988d7fcf1726e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ea8526866f2da739a67988d7fcf1726e\u0022\u003EHon GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour) (20:00)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Chair. Following on, I do have a question for the Minister in the chair, the Hon Chris Penk, in relation to clause 8 within the bill. I understand that this specifies those great things we all get sometimes on our birthdays or for presents, those gift cards\u2014it specifies that gift cards won\u2019t be treated as part of income subject to pay as you earn, unless, of course, the employer chooses to do so. I understand that later clauses in the bill ensure that the cards are in fact subject to the fringe benefit tax (FBT), if I\u2019m correct, and that\u2019s in clause 21, further on in the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis applies to, essentially, open loop gift cards. What I would really like to hear from the Minister is some sort of further specification as to what is actually classified as an open loop gift card. If he could provide a particular example, that would be of use. Also, if an open loop card is like money, why would they not be included as employment income, just like other forms of money? If he could speak to that, that would be really useful. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf in fact one of these open loop cards is like money and it can be spent anywhere, which many of those cards are open\u2014it\u2019s not just to one particular shop like The Warehouse; you can use it in multiple different outlets; and a closed loop card would be only spent at one particular place, such as Whitcoulls, one particular place only\u2014what about gift cards that are limited to shops in a particular geographic area, such as a mall? Queensgate mall in Lower Hutt\u2014you can buy one of these and you can buy anything within that vicinity\u2014which of those two does it fall into?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I would be really interested to know from the Minister is: wouldn\u2019t an easier way to do this be to treat them as like employer-provided accommodation rules, where employer-provided accommodation is taxed through the pay as you earn system instead of the FBT system? It does seem to be that there is quite a reasonable level of complication. People already do get a level of frustration when that gift card isn\u2019t used in time, but what is really the specification he can give people in terms of where they fall in the system and how this legislation treats open loop gift cards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022 data-id=\u00229c235de4fa95947339a06555a52fd90b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229c235de4fa95947339a06555a52fd90b\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS PENK (Minister for Building and Construction) (20:03)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Mr Chair. I\u2019ll just acknowledge the question posed by the Hon Dr Deborah Russell in relation to the politically fraught area in which she has invited me to stray regarding \u201Ccapital gains taxes\u201D (CGT). Of course, as the member herself will know and will indeed be much more au fait than me, given her academic background in the subject of taxation, there are such things as taxation on gains, notwithstanding that they might not have that label of CGT. Of course, famously, in the case of residential property where income is derived from the sale of a non-primary home, the questioner\u2019s intention as to whether one purchased the property for the purpose of onselling\u2014one might call \u201Cspeculating\u201D or \u201Cflipping\u201D\u2014and, of course, it\u2019s difficult to gauge intentions so there is a test that is easily knowable, a bright line, hence the name, of course, that brightline test. So I don\u2019t wish to open a general can of worms in terms of the desirability or otherwise, Dr Russell, of capital gains tax, but, simply, the purpose of clause 7 is to elucidate that the reference to capital gains tax should be read as a net amount, and, therefore, the amount that the company can distribute tax-free on liquidation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the clause 8 - related questions of your colleague the Hon Ginny Andersen, of course the policy balance to be struck in relation to fringe benefit tax generally is how to treat a benefit that goes from the employer to the employee, whether it should be regarded as income tax and, therefore, attract that manner of taxation, on the one hand, and, therefore, do we inadvertently disincentivise the provision of such\u2014I suppose\u2014\u201Cbonuses\u201D, to use the phrase possibly incorrectly. Certainly, in terms of encouraging small business and hospitality uptake by businesses and the generosity of bosses, we don\u2019t want to preclude that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of open loop gift cards more specifically, my understanding\u2014and I have to say that I\u2019m not particularly au fait with the area\u2014is that it\u2019s in the nature of a Prezzy Card, which is a particular brand of gift card but in the nature that you can load credit, effectively, and that\u2019s then usable at most if not all establishments, in the same way that credit cards might be usable almost universally.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u00222221c225cf4bd9f07848715221c26031\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222221c225cf4bd9f07848715221c26031\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (20:06)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I appreciate the answer that the Minister in the chair, the Hon Chris Penk, has just given. I do appreciate that the Minister sitting in the chair is filling in for the Minister of Revenue, so it does make it somewhat difficult for us to interrogate policy intent and thinking processes behind that, but, none the less, this Parliament does need to interrogate that and it does need answers on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think one of the questions\u2014I appreciate the Minister\u2019s answer there around gift cards, and I think we all now understand, after going through this bill, the difference between an open and a closed loop gift card. I guess the question that remains outstanding is whether or not there was policy consideration of treating them all the same\u2014of bringing them in. Why is it different if you get the Westfield card versus the Pak \u2019N Save gift card? What differentiates these cards and why are they going to be treated differently? What was the policy intent and what were the considerations that led the Minister to make these decisions? I think they are pertinent questions. I think we can all understand why it is that we do need to consider gift cards within our tax system. It could be a way to circumvent taxation rules. I still also think that the consideration about considering them through the PAYE system\u2014if that is the policy intent, then why was it not considered to do it that way rather than the fringe benefit tax (FBT)? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think we do need more discussion around that because what we\u2019re saying is these gift cards could be used instead of paying someone wages and salary, therefore we need to tax them. But why, then, is it coming through the FBT system and not through the PAYE system? When policy was being discussed, was there a difference between the bonus being paid in form of these, or these been given in lieu of wages\u2014was there any attempt to differentiate the different ways in which a business might attempt to use gift cards as a form of payment to employees? What was the consideration that was in behind that? I think we can all appreciate that if someone is paid $10,000 in Westfield vouchers as a bonus, that\u2019s somewhat different than them receiving their weekly wages in the form of either open or closed loop gift cards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo we need to understand more of the thinking behind that because it is a change. It\u2019s a change that needed to happen within our tax system, but it\u2019s one we need to understand. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022f158f8013429007b00110ef87034486c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f158f8013429007b00110ef87034486c\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (20:09)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Thank you to the Minister in the chair, the Hon Chris Penk, for his answers to questions; I think they\u2019re very assured, and clearly he\u2019s auditioning to be Minister of Revenue himself when he\u2019s promoted to Cabinet in due course.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust a further thought I want to carry on with these gift cards. It does puzzle me\u2014it\u2019s something that my colleague the Hon Ginny Andersen touched on\u2014as to why aren\u2019t these just being treated through the PAYE system. Look, there\u2019s a fascinating little wrinkle in the fringe benefit tax (FBT) rules that employer-provided accommodation is left out of the FBT rules. You\u2019d think it would be a fringe benefit, but it turns out that because farmers on-farm had provided accommodation for many years to employees and things like that. There was already a pretty good set of rules for including accommodation in taxation via the PAYE system, so why disturb a good thing when it\u2019s working well?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI mean, it raises a whole set of issues around FBT, which we\u2019re not going to traverse here, as to why we aren\u2019t doing that with all fringe benefits\u2014doing it through the PAYE system, because it could be done. But particularly these gift cards. The interesting thing about the gift cards is that, unlike a lot of fringe benefits, they\u2019re very easily valued. There\u2019s a very distinct value to them. If a person gets a Prezzy Card, it\u2019s worth $100 or $50 or $20\u2014the value is very, very clear. It\u2019s the same thing for the great majority of closed loop gift cards too. There is straightforwardly a value on them; there\u2019s no need to go through the kind of complicated rules that we have with vehicles: the days that they\u2019re in use and what they\u2019re being used for, and so on. There\u2019s no need to go through all the sorts of\u2014even the type of salary sacrifice stuff that goes on. There are all sorts of complications with the way we calculate FBT, but not for gift cards, again, because they are straightforward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to understand if consideration was given to just doing it straightforwardly through the PAYE system. It would have been a perfectly good way to it. Actually, I hope it\u2019s something that a future Minister of Revenue might investigate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022 data-id=\u0022929a7dc4599f664ea11b8a274dc27870\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022929a7dc4599f664ea11b8a274dc27870\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS PENK (Minister for Building and Construction) (20:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m grateful to the Hon Dr Megan Woods and the Hon Dr Deborah Russell for their comments and their questions around fringe benefit tax (FBT) versus PAYE as different mechanisms by which we could achieve, essentially, the same aim.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy understanding is that, from a compliance viewpoint, the change gives employers the choice whether to treat a bonus\u2014just to use that term generically\u2014under PAYE or as a fringe benefit tax - relevant bonus, so to speak. The distinction would be whichever the employer were to find easier. Certainly, from the point of view of small businesses, compliance costs, including as to tax administration, are avoided wherever possible, not in the sense of avoiding taxes, of course, but in avoiding the administration associated with that. There\u2019s a disproportionate effect of regulation, including in relation to taxation, where a small business might not have an in-house accountant and might be doing the accounts, so to speak, on the kitchen table, perhaps surrounded by hard-copy receipts. Certainly, to make life easier for them, to give them the choice as to which is the easier from a compliance perspective is, we think, helpful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust to close the loop on that discussion about the closed loop gift cards\u2014if you\u2019ll excuse me\u2014these are already subject to fringe benefit tax. The change in this legislation is to align the treatment with that of open loop cards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAs for the policy intent that Dr Woods has invited me to expound further upon, my understanding is that there was a pretty full consideration about some of these broader policy aspects, but it\u2019s not necessary to raise or to reconcile all of those, I suppose, certainly with all the differing views that might be out there in terms of the way that we could treat FBT versus PAYE in our system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022 data-id=\u0022710ccaab9ab452758984f16ebc6c0744\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022710ccaab9ab452758984f16ebc6c0744\u0022\u003EREUBEN DAVIDSON (Labour\u2014Christchurch East) (20:13)\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister in the chair, the Hon Chris Penk, may think that we\u2019ve talked about gift cards a lot, but, as someone who sat on the Economic Development, Science and Innovation Committee when we were considering the subject of expiration dates for gift cards, I\u2019m sure the Minister is aware that it\u2019s now come into law that the universal date for those gift cards has to be a minimum of three years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt was a significant shift. There were a lot of gift cards that were being issued with much shorter expiration dates, and a number of people sitting around the table at that select committee, but also probably in the Chamber tonight, have examples in their lives of gloveboxes and top drawers and parts of their desk that have got gift cards that are no longer worth anything at all. What we\u2019re seeing with this shift to a three-year standard expiration date for open loop and closed loop gift cards is that the potential for their use is quite likely to change over this next financial year. Has there been any consideration given to, or modelling requested by the Minister around, what those changes or trends are likely to look like as a result of a shift in the expiration dates, by law, of gift cards\u2014the minimum expiration date\u2014and, therefore, the behaviour of use of those gift cards, particularly in the workplace?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EEmployers could, potentially, purchase those in much larger quantities. They don\u2019t need to worry any more about the fact that they may expire within a short period from when they give them to an employee. Employees may see a greater value in those gift cards because they have a longer expiration date on them. They may well be more likely to be inclined to want or to request to receive those by way of payment for works rendered or as a bonus for additional tasks or objectives realised in the carrying out of their employment or the tasks put upon them by their employer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReally, the questions for the Minister would be around what considerations were given to changes in behaviour, to the use of both open and closed loop gift cards, potentially, by the general public, but also by employers, who may choose to use those now to different extents and in different ways to how they were previously used in the workplace. I\u2019m really interested to hear.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022 data-id=\u0022c47c14c2c46aa8b0085462fc25b66740\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c47c14c2c46aa8b0085462fc25b66740\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS PENK (Minister for Building and Construction) (20:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you to Reuben Davidson for the questions about gift cards. I\u2019ve got a couple of questions myself, actually: \u201CWhy can I never find the damned things when I need them?\u201D Secondly: \u201CWhy does the period of time come up so quickly?\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EHe\u2019s right, of course, to reference that change. I think it was universally agreed around the House, following a member\u2019s bill by our colleague and friend the Hon Melissa Lee, that three years can certainly go very quickly as a period of time. I\u2019m well aware of that now as a first-term Government Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d18aaf1792ff4d24b504e6c7f6bd8b94\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha! Three years goes fast.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002242588501bcafea3ec619b6a72f53a9bb\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS PENK\u003C/span\u003E: Three years goes very fast, doesn\u2019t it? Well, not when you\u2019re in Opposition, Dr Woods. Isn\u2019t it funny how time sort of travels differently according to the side of the House one is on?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECertainly, from the point of view of consideration, it seems to me that we\u2019re in a new regime now, in terms of gift cards having a minimum expiry period, as the member has observed. Therefore, that was sort of known, that was factored in, in terms of policy discussion around how to treat gift cards\u2014again, referencing that fringe benefit tax (FBT) versus PAYE discussion. I\u2019m advised that treating open-loop cards under PAYE is more complex because it requires a gross up for things like student loans, KiwiSaver, etc., which is fairly complicated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGoing back to the point that was raised around employer-provided accommodation, obviously rural settings are one such instance in which they occur\u2014certainly it\u2019s an important area for employees of the New Zealand Defence Force\u2014but those rules predate FBT rules and the question is, I think, probably unlikely to fit within the scope of the bill, given that we\u2019re not really straying into that sort of area, given that it is existing policy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0115569c67b20cfb0f85de057dd6cff\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: I write down the names of members and the clauses they talk to. I\u2019ve got lots of names on clause 8, which would indicate to me that we are probably bogged down. The Hon Dr Deborah Russell will un-bog us, I hope.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022433af7882e2ef64d9bf7b05d31bcae0b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022433af7882e2ef64d9bf7b05d31bcae0b\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (20:17)\u003C/span\u003E: A very relevant point. I understand that Dr Woods does have one new question on that particular clause, and it is quite an important one, but I will move on, myself, to clause 9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat clause 9 is: again, it\u2019s an entirely new section being inserted into the Act, and it\u2019s \u201CReimbursement of employee expenditure for benefit\u201D. What happens here, as far as I can tell, is that what it\u2019s trying to deal with is where an employee incurs an expense\u2014and the expense is for their own benefit, all right\u2014but then the employer refunds them the amount. Now, that\u2019s going to be an amount of money received by the employee. Technically, it falls into the definition of \u201Cincome\u201D, all right? That is employment income of the employee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000709\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELet\u2019s think about this. An example of this would be, perhaps\u2014and it happens\u2014if an employee goes and gets a flu vaccination and has to pay for it, but the employer refunds that amount, or an employee goes and pays the fees for a gym subscription, and the employer refunds the amount. Because it\u2019s an amount received in money, it fits into the definition of \u201Cincome\u201D. What this clause is doing is something perfectly sensible, which is saying, actually\u2014so that\u2019s going to count as income in one form or another, and it could be treated as an unclassified benefit in the fringe benefit tax (FBT) rules or it could be treated as employment income and taxed through the FBT rules, and the employer can choose to do that. This is all perfectly sensible law, and I rather like it. But what I am confused about is why we need this in the first place. You\u2019d have thought that people would have been getting this right all along.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000710\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EActually, what I was thinking is: was there something going on here? Was there some mischief going on here that needed to be shut down? That was my immediate thought on this clause. Was there a little bit of something just a little bit skanky going on\u2014a bit skanky\u2014which happens, or maybe people not even doing it deliberately but it\u2019s just a practice that\u2019s built up, and people, employers and employees, particularly, I guess, in small businesses or smaller ones, weren\u2019t quite aware of what they were doing and the tax implications of what they were doing?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000711\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat\u2019s perfectly possible. Lots of people do actually get their tax all wrong from time to time, not because they are trying to get it wrong, but because they just make a mistake, and usually Inland Revenue is perfectly happy to help them to sort it out without any penalties as long as people fess up. Was there a particular mischief going on in this space? That would be interesting to know.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002203f23b4e4533db16f4cb4ae0972a434f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000712\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002203f23b4e4533db16f4cb4ae0972a434f\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (20:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I do have one question on clause 8 before I move on to clause 9.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000713\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a02c35fde345055d28aae2123de12fad\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve got a little space here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000714\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f26a5a511f7f8cf3ce4e58714daf4eb2\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: I want to thank the Minister in the chair, the Hon Chris Penk, for his commentary. Again, as we heard in previous bills around the extension of gift card expiries to three years, I think one of the things I found the strangest, as a Chinese person, is that we tend to give out red packets with actual cash in it, which is eternal\u2014you don\u2019t lose the value on that\u2014whereas, coming here, you pretend to know someone by buying them a gift card, for the same value but with an expiration date, which, to me, was always the weirdest and wildest thing that\u2019s different from my culture.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000715\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question I have is around new section CE 1(2B)(b), inserted by clause 8. This is a change after the select committee, I presume, and it\u2019s completely different from what was there before, because it says, \u201Cbenefit in money does not include a gift card unless\u2014the provision of the card has a purpose or effect of defeating the application of the Child Support Act 1991.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000716\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, for the Minister, in terms of context, one of my first jobs was working at child support at Inland Revenue. It was a highly contentious environment because, when payments involving children are involved, either spouse tends not to conduct themselves in a way that is most conducive to the benefit of the child. I guess, in this case, when you\u2019re tracking PAYE and you\u2019re deducting child support through PAYE, it is easy to track, but if you\u2019re doing it and considering gift cards as benefit in money, how then would you be able to track that when it comes to the application of child support, to say that that person has indeed given me a gift card valued at the equivalent amount that is comparable to what I should be receiving as child support? I think it\u2019s more about, I guess, how one would prove that that gift card has been given.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000717\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy next question is following on from the Hon Dr Deborah Russell\u2019s question around clause 9. I\u2019m specifically looking at new section CE 1BA(4), which is \u201CExclusion: payments for certain work-related meals\u201D. Again, we\u2019re seeing a level of specificity in this bill around certain benefits, and work-related meals in certain professions are reasonably common\u2014if you work late\u2014but so is work-related travel. My question is: why are work-related meals considered but work-related travel\u2014if it\u2019s travelling back home late in the evening, etc., which I\u2019m sure anyone in the legal profession can sympathise with\u2014is not part of this? Those are my two questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022 data-id=\u00228a9390d9f4228685777e67d467a84f23\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000718\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228a9390d9f4228685777e67d467a84f23\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS PENK (Minister for Building and Construction) (20:24)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much. I might have to take a moment to consider and be advised upon the second point, but the first that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan makes: firstly, a nice reference to the red packets, very topical around the time of Lunar New Year\u2014\u7EA2\u5305, I think. Good luck to Hansard with that one!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000719\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think clearly his role in relation to child support and IRD is a very taxing one, but I don\u2019t think there is any change proposed, in terms of the legislation, that would alter the status of the equivalency of gift cards versus income.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000720\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe most straightforward answer, in terms of the question from the Hon Dr Megan Woods: I don\u2019t think there\u2019s any particular mischief that was contemplated that needed solving, in terms of the receipt of money being treated somehow differently from income regularly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u002248995c06d1b494d38da5a3b80be985c1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000721\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002248995c06d1b494d38da5a3b80be985c1\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (20:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I do just have one very specific question on clause 8 to return to. One of the things that the Finance and Expenditure Committee (FEC) are very well served by officials on, when we examine tax legislation, is the very thorough bill commentaries that come out of IR. I\u2019d like to thank officials for the work they do on that. It goes through a number of the clauses.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000722\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EOne of the things with the gift cards in the bill commentary\u2014that\u2019s on page 145, just for the officials who are helping out\u2014\u201CThe proposed amendment would take effect for benefits provided on or after 16 April 2025.\u201D Now, this is highly unusual in tax legislation, to have a retrospective provision within that, which is going to count from 16 April rather than being forward-looking from, say, 1 April 2026, given that this bill will come into effect on 31 March, if it passes. Isn\u2019t that correct, Dr Russell?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223802ea4404d30c9de0113cae8672c172\u0022\u003EHon Dr Deborah Russell\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s right.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000724\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c4ef4841437a4302283c6f451b5f9bf4\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS\u003C/span\u003E: March the 31st 2026. Why are we having some retrospective provisions within this legislation? I think that\u2019s something we\u2019d be keen to understand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000725\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlso, for the Minister in the chair, the Hon Chris Penk, given we\u2019ve just caught that one, when I flip over to the bill commentary on clause 9, which my colleague the Hon Dr Deborah Russell has just been discussing, which is the equalisation of fringe benefit tax (FBT) and PAYE in clause 9, that is taking effect from 1 April 2026. I would like to know from the Minister whether there are any other clauses in the bill that have retrospective application. We\u2019ve noticed it in this one clause, in clause 8, but are there any other clauses there too?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000726\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust in terms of this bill commentary that IR provided to members of FEC, it actually gives some really good real-world examples of the ways in which some of these provisions in these clauses could apply. For clause 9, which has just been given, there\u2019s a very good example of Spiderwebs Comix Ltd employee Adrian, who works hard over the weekend and is told to take his partner out for dinner, up to the value of $400, to thank him for the work that he\u2019s done in terms of working at a time when he wouldn\u2019t normally. This was \u201Cto salvage the stock\u201D\u2014the example that\u2019s given in the example. He goes out and the bill is $380 and he is reimbursed for that amount. Spiderwebs treats this amount as a fringe benefit and accounts for FBT on the amount as an unclassified benefit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000727\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat would happen if the employee loses the receipt? We know that this is often something that happens in terms of this\u2014that the employer has said, \u201CGo and knock yourself out; take your partner out for a slap-up meal, up to the value of $400.\u201D Would they have ended up paying the fringe benefit tax on the full $400 amount if that was the verbal or written agreement that was between them? We know that lost receipts are quite a thing within the tax world, and has consideration been given for how you\u2019d account for just the kind of scenario that IR has provided in the bill commentary?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000728\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002287b2ec57a9269da8194400a2f13b2795\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Dr Deborah Woods\u2014sorry, the Hon Dr Deborah Russell.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022c59712af27bf2561067ecfb64ab8ac63\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000729\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c59712af27bf2561067ecfb64ab8ac63\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (20:28)\u003C/span\u003E: For the clarity of the committee, it\u2019s the Hon Dr Megan Woods, the Hon Dr Deborah Russell, and Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000730\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022184d3824b9792c66dff7913851eceac8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: And clause 8!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000731\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f8c65351c717061309278c456129b50d\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: This is not a clause 8 question. I want to go on to clause 10.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000732\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, clause 10 is associated with employee share scheme rules, which we are going to want to talk about later on. I will want to talk about the substance of those rules later on, but I just want some clarity. Anyone who is reading through this would go\u2014looking at clause 10, that has section CE 7B, which is amended, it\u2019s got a little definition there: \u201Cliquidity event date\u201D. I have great respect for that tax drafting team, but they\u2019ve come up with a little soubriquet here, and I just want to know exactly what that is. What is a \u201Cliquidity event date\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000733\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m sure there\u2019s an answer there somewhere on that. \u201CBless\u201D, I always think, when I see things like that, but I would like to know exactly what it is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000734\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227b3ebe24438640afbed0da464f9b88bc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224dadc41fa656a348673be058ebd48a06\u0022\u003EHon Andrew Bayly\u003C/span\u003E: IPO.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000735\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229495523e12cab63cb2384cce178f60fe\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Well, if Mr Bayly would like to participate, I\u2019m sure he\u2019s very welcome.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000736\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227b3ebe24438640afbed0da464f9b88bc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de985f002cfdaa7a82f5be7ad147255c\u0022\u003EHon Andrew Bayly\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s a simple answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000737\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022030447a081ffdef1baa4ea4232bea13b\u0022\u003EHon Ginny Andersen\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Bayly has had a liquidity event today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000738\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d5a6185920e9aa453cbf7466e14172b\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha! [\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EMember resumes seat\u003C/span\u003E]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000739\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296732f9a7e6dbddf720d29d9c4fc7dd3\u0022\u003EHon Chris Penk\u003C/span\u003E: You caused that!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022 data-id=\u002266ff1073297ce027793cf81eb695fa13\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000740\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002266ff1073297ce027793cf81eb695fa13\u0022\u003EHon GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour) (20:30)\u003C/span\u003E: I feel responsible to stand up and take a call, seeing as I caused that. I\u2019d like to reassure you\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000741\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ed45175b0687aa1115d4f46473e750f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m not sure I should be rewarding you, but you have the call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000742\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a2ddbf9ab45d20291e5de7bec45342a\u0022\u003EHon GINNY ANDERSEN\u003C/span\u003E: I would like to, first of all, reassure you, Mr Chair, that I will not ask any questions about gift cards, Prezzy Cards, or any other form of cards. But I do have a question in relation to clause 9 because there\u2019s a whole new section in there, \u201CNew section CE 1BA inserted\u201D. It provides, specifically, when an employer pays an amount to reimburse an employee for an expenditure the employee has incurred for benefit. There\u2019s been some discussion on this in terms of whether it\u2019s a dinner, it could be a gym membership, it could be even things like glasses\u2014like if you need spectacles, that can be charged back.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000743\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I\u2019m concerned about is we haven\u2019t really understood from the Minister what the problem is that is being fixed. I have not heard that back. Given the context of this Government in terms of some of the legislation already passed in terms of undermining workers\u2019 rights\u2014we\u2019ve seen an absolute plethora of bills through this House that have fundamentally stripped away some of the core rights that workers have fought hard to attain over the decades; whether we want to go into all those details, probably not. But my question is: given that history and given that reputation that this Government has for undermining workers\u2019 rights, did they identify a particular employee benefit that they would like to erase, and is that part of the rationale or part of the problem that we\u2019re trying to fix here?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000744\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen again, and as we were talking about whether it could be a\u2014that point we just made before; we still don\u2019t know what the liquidity event would be. Is it going out to the pub? Is that included in a liquidity event? If your employer takes an employee out to the pub and then wants reimbursing afterwards, is that a liquidity event? I\u2019m not sure. Could you please specify.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022 data-id=\u0022cc486d4b48a58553bc6ffe149dd313c0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000745\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cc486d4b48a58553bc6ffe149dd313c0\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS PENK (Minister for Building and Construction) (20:32)\u003C/span\u003E: I wish I could provide more guidance on the lost liquidity date issue that the Hon Ginny Andersen mentions. I feel like we should accord her an honorary PhD just to get the real benefit of the \u201CDr, Dr\u201D joke going. I was thinking the liquidity question was actually an even worse pun than my musings that I hadn\u2019t been brave enough to make about fringe benefit and how my understanding is that\u2019s the advantage when one brushes one\u2019s hair forward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000746\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOn the serious point that\u2019s raised, I think by the Hon Dr Megan Woods, regarding retrospectivity, the point there is that the date is that on which the commissioner issued public guidance that altered the treatment of open loop cards and see that PAYE should be used to account for these, so it\u2019s really aligning with that real-world understanding of the treatment. So for the legislation to sort of look to that date and provide that certainty and alignment seems, to me, appropriate. And that\u2019s the case wherever such dates arise in the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000747\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the loss of receipts following a \u201Cslap-up meal\u201D, it seems to me that that\u2019s, number one, an unfortunate incident, but I think there would be the usual understanding about how one would treat that. Of course, the best guidance that I can possibly give viewers\u2014should there be any left at this point\u2014would be, simply, to hold on to your receipts. If an outfit is called Spider Web, you\u2019d think that they would be online rather than operating on the basis of paper receipts, but you never know. I think that\u2019s all the points that have been made that have not yet been answered.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000748\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAlthough, actually, coming back to the meals point that Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan raised, clause 9 refers to meals in a way that ensures that the current rules around limitation on reimbursement of meals elsewhere in the Act be circumvented through the fringe benefit tax rules.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022d2b7ab8021c194aff4becc523652b2c0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000749\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d2b7ab8021c194aff4becc523652b2c0\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (20:34)\u003C/span\u003E: I note that this part goes from clause 4 to clause 106, and we\u2019re at about clause 13 and there is a very substantial Amendment Paper that we must discuss, but we haven\u2019t reached it yet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000750\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to go to clause 11. Clause 11 includes trustees in a list of people who don\u2019t get taxed when they get a gratuitous payment. I was puzzled by this. I sort of thought, \u201CWell, what is this about?\u201D I just want some clarification here. Trustees are usually paid for their services. It\u2019s normally a straightforward income-earning opportunity for trustees, or what they earn is normally actually taxed. I thought about this and I thought this is maybe to do with being the trustee of an executor of an estate. Now, it\u2019s often the case that in a will, a person will make an extra payment to someone who is going to act as the executor of the will or act as a trustee for it, and that sort of happens. So you can imagine in a family where one child, who perhaps is an accountant or lawyer or has some expertise in that space, is asked to be the executor of the will or has that kind of trustee-type role, but then there is no payment for it but there\u2019s an extra amount provided in the will\u2014not actually as payment for it but as recognition that they\u2019ve done it. So I just want to clarify that that\u2019s the sort of situation that we have in mind there so that they are not taxed on that service that they are providing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000751\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMr Chair, if no one else is\u2014I could carry on with some other questions. I do want to move on to something quite substantial now, in the context of this bill, and that is the work on\u2014I want to go to clause 15, inserting new sections CW 22B to CW 22D. It\u2019s a really important new section. It\u2019s a policy section, and it inserts new sections that deal with digital nomads. Digital nomads are the people who come and live in New Zealand for a while, they work here but they\u2019re actually just kind of working remotely from their normal place where they live. Now, it\u2019s a little complicated as to how all of this works; there\u2019s a whole set of sections in here. New section CW 22B makes that income exempt from taxation in New Zealand. That\u2019s fairly straightforward. New section CW 22C brings\u2014oh, I\u2019ll just leave that for the time being. New section CW 22D actually does the work of exempting digital nomads by setting up new definitions in the Act, and this is where it gets interesting.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000752\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA whole lot of the machinery of the Income Tax Act sits in the definitions, which sit in Part Y of the Act, and the particular rules around residency sit in Subpart YD. In order to make sense of all this, we actually have to jump forward to clause 98, which sets up a new definition\u2014now that\u2019s on pages 63 to 65 of the bill, which is available on the Table. So what is to be done over these digital nomads? People who are in New Zealand, they\u2019re here living somewhere, doing all the things that people do, visiting all the sites, but they\u2019re also working from home. The standard definition for when someone gets caught in the income tax net here in New Zealand, I think it\u2019s 183 days\u2014officials will correct me if I\u2019ve got that number wrong\u2014in a 12-month period. What we\u2019ve gone for is a digital nomad is someone who is in New Zealand for, I think, no more than 275 days in an 18-month period. So what I want to understand from that: now, the 275 days, if you take an 18-month period then\u2014sorry. That\u2019s exactly the same proportionality; you know, 275 days in an 18-month period is the same proportionality as 183 days in a 365-day\u2014no worries with that. But why 18 months?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000753\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo I\u2019d like to know from the Minister what policy advice he got, what understandings he got from officials as to why 18 months\u201418 months as opposed to two years, 18 months as opposed to three years, because the proportionality could have been done quite easily. I guess there\u2019s a point at which someone really does become a resident rather than a non-resident for tax purposes, but \u201CWhy 18 months?\u201D is my first question around the digital nomads.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u002296ab2f23ab82dd0ce29ac0c6dab8f142\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000754\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002296ab2f23ab82dd0ce29ac0c6dab8f142\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (20:39)\u003C/span\u003E: I have some questions also on the same clause, and it is around the digital nomad work. Again, I want to go to the bill commentary and the substantial analysis that is put into this part of it. The question I had also is: why does there seem to be this bespoke definition that is out of kilter in terms of the time that needs to be here? It doesn\u2019t line up with other tax law. I think that it is incredibly difficult for what we need to understand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000755\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing that I\u2019m not clear from reading through this is: why not a tax resident instead of a resident? There doesn\u2019t seem to be alignment of language through various things.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000756\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things that this bill attempted to was grapple not only with digital nomads but with the influencers. There\u2019s an influencer tax in here as well, which is something that, I think, stretches the bounds of how we understand it in terms of someone coming here for a very short period of time to promote something in New Zealand. Some very good examples are given\u2014one of them as an influencer paid by a New Zealand agency to showcase New Zealand. Josh is a New Zealand citizen who resides in Australia\u2014they want to make this as complicated as possible. He\u2019s a world-renowned travel influencer with a strong following on social media, mainly from his art deco community and his knowledge of 1920s and 1930s architecture. A New Zealand tourism agency is keen to promote New Zealand\u2019s art deco heritage, and they contract Josh to come to New Zealand to produce. Because Josh has been paid for promotional services by a New Zealand business, he would not meet the definition of a \u201Cnon-resident visitor\u201D. Remember the complexity here\u2014Josh is also a New Zealand citizen who resides in Australia, so we\u2019ve sought to make this as complicated as possible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000757\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think it is incredibly important that our tax system turns its mind to how it is we deal with these situations and how tax might be applied. One of the things I\u2019m not clear on is: is there alignment with other OECD countries? Of course, these are, by definition, a global network of earners who will go to various jurisdictions. I\u2019m sure Josh doesn\u2019t save his art deco knowledge just for New Zealand, but he\u2019ll go and moonlight in other countries too. How is it that his income in those countries is treated? Is New Zealand entering into something where we can see some synergies across the countries that we would compare ourselves to normally in a tax context?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000758\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen there\u2019s another example that\u2019s put in here, and that\u2019s an influencer paid by an overseas client to promote their brand. Ben is a New Zealand citizen residing in Milan. Ben has been a well-known lifestyle fashion influencer with a significant following. While in Queenstown, Ben arranges promotional services for an Italian boutique trousers brand. Because that is not a New Zealand business, the promotional services are provided to his overseas client. Therefore, Ben meets the definition of a \u201Cnon-resident visitor\u201D. We can see this is getting very, very complicated quickly because he is a New Zealand citizen and he\u2019s residing in Milan\u2014not in Australia, as Josh was\u2014but he is being paid by an overseas brand, so, therefore, he meets the definition of a \u201Cnon-resident visitor\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000759\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019d just like to know if there were alternative ways of treating someone in Ben\u2019s situation that were put up from a policy perspective\u2014were other ways of thinking about how that may be treated in terms of income?\u2014and whether the Minister of Revenue received any advice on that. Again, much like the situation that Josh found himself in, does this put Ben into a situation where, if he goes and promotes trousers in other places in the world, he might be taxed in a similar way? Where does it sit in international tax law, and how might there be alignment between various jurisdictions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022 data-id=\u00220bc1021abfdb49aeef9b6d21d2397021\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000760\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220bc1021abfdb49aeef9b6d21d2397021\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS PENK (Minister for Building and Construction) (20:44)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I think\u2014in the case of Ben, now of Milan; and Josh, whose art deco expertise is apparently in such hot international demand\u2014it\u2019s worth observing that while the nature of their digitally nomadic activity might be that they end up being treated differently in different nations\u2014OECD or other\u2014the Minister of Revenue received good advice about different jurisdictions\u2019 treatment of these kinds of policy areas. It\u2019s not for me to offer a view on whether all of those other OECD nations have exactly the same regime\u2014I suspect strongly the answer is not. Nevertheless, international alignment and particularly thinking about ways that the matter has been treated successfully in other tax jurisdictions, I\u2019m certain, would have been forefront of the Minister\u2019s mind when he was considering that, along with the coherence with other aspects of New Zealand\u2019s tax code.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022f3f47b872f9b4f77d3878d5562813bae\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000761\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f3f47b872f9b4f77d3878d5562813bae\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (20:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, thank you. Continuing with the discussion of digital nomads, which was one of the major policy pieces of this bill, one of the things that happens here is that a person is living in New Zealand, residing in New Zealand\u2014they\u2019re here for up to 18 months; it\u2019s quite a long period of time\u2014and, in that time, they are earning an income from overseas, and they are paying taxes overseas. The concern here is not that they\u2019re not getting taxed, right? These people are paying tax fairly and reasonably.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe difficulty with this is just that we have a group of people who are coming and living in New Zealand, driving on our roads, using our hospital system, enjoying the protection of the fire services and the emergency services\u2014they\u2019re pretty safe because this is mostly a fairly safe country, protected by our police, and so on\u2014yet because of these rules, they won\u2019t be making a contribution to our tax base. Of course, they will be paying GST on whatever they consume in this country, but, actually, ordinary New Zealanders pay GST too, and, probably, we pay more than digital nomads because everything is based here for us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000763\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere is a concern here that by not taxing the digital nomads\u2014and these are people who have more than exceeded the amount of time that you have to be in a country before you\u2019re ordinarily counted as a tax resident. It\u2019s not so much they\u2019re not paying tax; it\u2019s just that they\u2019re not paying tax towards their place, their standing, or their whatever in New Zealand. We want to be able to accommodate these digital nomads; I guess the feeling is that they are spending some of their money here, but New Zealanders spend their money here too. There is an issue here: just to what contribution do they make to New Zealand in return for all the benefits they get from New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000764\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing sitting here is I\u2019d like to understand whether the Minister of Revenue got any policy advice or any analysis of the value that digital nomads bring to New Zealand. Literally, how does it increase our GDP, and is it worth it? What is the balance of costs and benefits here? Now, I get the point we do actually want to be hospitable to people; we actually do want people to come to New Zealand and to enjoy our country. I suspect that most of the people who come as digital nomads, if they\u2019re working remotely, are going to be highly educated and well-paid people and things like that. They\u2019re people whose company, I\u2019m sure, we would all enjoy as being part of our country for a while. Nevertheless, I trust the Minister can see the point there. I would hope that there is a financial benefit to New Zealand out of this, given that we are enabling them to remit all their taxes to an overseas country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022 data-id=\u0022fac2ab95819968888bdd7a768d49f2da\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000765\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fac2ab95819968888bdd7a768d49f2da\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS PENK (Minister for Building and Construction) (20:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019m grateful to the Hon Dr Deborah Russell for her points regarding digital nomads. Of course, she\u2019s right that we are giving up, in a sense, the income tax that these people might otherwise be paying to New Zealand. Then again, there\u2019s also benefit to New Zealand in the way that digital nomads oftentimes will promote New Zealand, including in the influencer example that we\u2019ve had brought forward tonight. That\u2019s part of the general policy discussion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000766\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, the member quite rightly points out that GST is applied to the goods and services that such visitors\u2014digital nomads\u2014spend here. Of course, to the extent that we are attracting visitors to be digital nomads and in a way that they might not have otherwise visited New Zealand\u2014certainly as tax residents here\u2014there\u2019s an additionality that we have, by the fact that they\u2019ve come here, feeling enabled to do so, and earned money, perhaps prolonging their stay and enabling them to spend more money here. I think there\u2019s a certain logic to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000767\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGoing back to the point that the member had raised around the 18-month period versus the 12-month period, as she rightly notes, the proportionality is the same\u2014roughly one in two days. The 18-month period, I\u2019m happy to advise, relates to the general visitor visa period.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022f6dd96bb91f0f82291c4883862facd69\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000768\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f6dd96bb91f0f82291c4883862facd69\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (20:50)\u003C/span\u003E: I note that this is a long and complicated part of the bill and we have yet to discuss the Minister of Revenue\u2019s significant Amendment Paper, particularly Amendment Paper 590 and Amendment Paper 589, but before we do that, there is other stuff in this bill we need to discover; issues that the Minister\u2014various Ministers\u2014touted as excellent measures.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000769\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI want to move on to clause 19\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000770\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad016fc63b892b289971e40c3e5be14f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Just before you do\u2014I agree with the member: there\u2019s still substantial in this bill, but I\u2019d like the questions to be more concise rather than building too much around the questions. If we can stick to the point\u2014from everybody, not pointing to any particular member\u2014but, to this side, there is a bit left to traverse. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000771\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a5c96b2859c72b4a73fc5ce23f4ad610\u0022\u003ETom Rutherford\u003C/span\u003E: Less preamble, more amble.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000772\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002207a8530abcc8d1d7d075cdfa9467963a\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: Take a call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000773\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223730d4b6be304aa3ed46db975dc4a484\u0022\u003ETom Rutherford\u003C/span\u003E: I tried.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000774\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b586430734fbb85448b3cf67d7c86859\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: Going to call another closure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000775\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c4b708892dc717f93c9fd75e21718203\u0022\u003ETom Rutherford\u003C/span\u003E: How do you know?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000776\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c4d21911f49d151e573fca16b701219d\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: OK, take a call then.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000777\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc71914c1a1b3548df368a2a1e078144\u0022\u003ETom Rutherford\u003C/span\u003E: I was trying.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000778\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221f002dbd74e1f1377ace0a8e787e9149\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: You are very trying.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000779\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fee6433d2acba855dd631251bc4d0471\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Are we finished?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000780\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225665429d0814fdac6033715ccdaf4dca\u0022\u003ETom Rutherford\u003C/span\u003E: No\u2014no, no, no.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000781\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d404a7e4a1476a034cc7899648326121\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m finished. You can go. I don\u2019t know if Mr Rutherford\u2019s finished, but I have.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000782\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022da20274d3bc7c0ba867c48a25793a1b3\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. OK, so I want to move on to clause 19 and it\u2019s a really interesting clause\u2014as all clauses in tax bills are. It introduces new section CW 61B, \u201CIncome from the supply of excess electricity from dwelling\u201D. This is a great measure. What it, basically, says is if you\u2019ve got a solar array on your roof, you\u2019re generating electricity, and you\u2019re selling some of it back\u2014electricity you mostly use in your own home, but then you sell any surplus back to the grid\u2014you\u2019re not going to get taxed on the income you earn from selling it back to the grid. It\u2019s an excellent measure and, I guess, this is a question as to some of the reasoning behind this. Obviously, it\u2019s a tax simplification measure. It makes life easier for individuals because they\u2019re not having to deal with the tax system\u2014to keep records and all those sorts of things. It\u2019s also a simplification because if individuals are earning that income, they could also take deductions in some ways, and that could be quite complicated. But what I\u2019m interested in is the bit that we argued for at select committee: \u201Coccupied as resident of the property\u201D. This was something that came from a variety of submitters that they said, \u201CWell, hang on a second. We\u2019ve got to be careful that landlords don\u2019t derive the extra income benefit. It needs to go to the people who are actually the users, the ones who have the connection to the grid.\u201D, and so on. And so the dwelling has to be occupied as a residence by the person, so a landlord couldn\u2019t do it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000783\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn the select committee, and here in the committee, those of us on this side of the Chamber just saw this as a fairness measure, but the Minister\u2019s officials, in particular, seem to see it as a simplification measure. They didn\u2019t want people claiming the deductions, so, in a sense, they rejected the fairness argument, and they went for the claiming deductions argument\u2014whatever. But, actually, I just want to know what side of that the Minister falls on, because there\u2019s a bit of a difference there. So does the Minister regard this just as a fairness measure; that it has to be occupied as a residence by the person? Does the Minister agree with the amendment that was put forward by the select committee, and the reasons that the select committee did it; or does he tend more to go to the official side of that one where they say it was around deductions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022 data-id=\u00222b632486f5c4a38dafe4137e67331c54\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000784\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222b632486f5c4a38dafe4137e67331c54\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS PENK (Minister for Building and Construction) (20:54)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. In terms of the reason for that excess electricity provision and feeding back into grid, I think it\u2019s worth noting there are good public policy reasons that we want to encourage that kind of provision. And, of course, excess electricity is the very definition of a good problem to have. I don\u2019t think one needs to land on the side either of fairness or the deduction in simplicity - type argument. There can be different ways and different routes at which we arrive at the same point, and it seems that that is what has taken place with the select committee making this recommendation and it being accepted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000785\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the point around digital nomads, without wanting to belabour the point, oftentimes they\u2019ll have their own health insurance, so there\u2019s less of a burden that they might impose on the New Zealand purse\u2014the public purse of Kiwis proper. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000786\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the advice on the impacts of the policy, I understand there is limited data in terms of remote workers in New Zealand and, therefore, only limited analysis was possible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022 data-id=\u002267f3e41ef5ff543b9385d6c812f5e065\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000787\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220750364c2c1444d0ae00bced720f964e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002267f3e41ef5ff543b9385d6c812f5e065\u0022\u003EHon GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour) (20:55)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019d like to leap ahead in the bill, if so permitted, to the clauses 33 to 35. In 33 to 35, there are a series of amendments here that all pertain to the Investment Boost rules. Now, these, as we so vividly remember, were introduced in Budget night legislation 2025\u2014the same Budget that scrapped 33 pay equity claims\u2014that was passed under urgency, and, now, we see a series of amendments to Investment Boost. It\u2019s unsurprising, but we do need to ask for feedback from the Minister and IRD, if necessary, why these amendments are necessary so soon after passing the legislation. I\u2019m interested to know from the Minister in the chair, the Hon Chris Penk: could have the same outcomes, such as fairness for taxpayers, come through, potentially, some of the commissioner\u2019s discretion\u2014like, why is legislation required for these changes?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000788\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESome of these changes\u2014we have replaced section DI 4(a) in there, where it expands the meaning of the improvement and extends it to \u201Call asset classes including petroleum and mining development expenditure\u201D. So my question, in relation to that replaced section, is: why do we need to expand improvement to \u201Calteration, extension, or repair\u201D? Is there a potential reason? Did Shane Jones ask for that? I\u2019m not sure. I\u2019d love to know if there\u2019s a particular reason why we need to expand that definition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000789\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, there\u2019s been another new section in there as well, immediately after that, which is in DI 4B, and that expands the immediate 20\u00A0percent write-off under that Investment Boost provision\u2014provides it to be extended to farm development expenditure, petroleum development expenditure, and mining development expenditure. My question to the Minister is: with expanding that 20 percent write-off under Investment Boost, could this result in double deductions? Has that been considered by officials and has he received any advice as to whether that could result in double deductions and a double cash-flow advantage? Have those issues been considered when those series of amendments have been made in and around Investment Boost?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022 data-id=\u0022d02b142793faa1ce9d242ffcda985b6c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000790\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022624b5e5ecd274e178a4554c1ae59f723\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d02b142793faa1ce9d242ffcda985b6c\u0022\u003EHon CHRIS PENK (Minister for Building and Construction) (20:58)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019m grateful to the member for inviting me to breach the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003ECabinet Manual\u003C/span\u003E by describing whether it was what one might call a \u201CShane Jones special\u201D, or perhaps other Ministers were particularly attached to the idea of the amendment that\u2019s been described in relationship improvement extension, and, of course, as the Government\u2019s policy position, that this was a change worth making, and so it was proposed in legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000791\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd then to her prior point about whether commissioner discretion could have been used in lieu of amending the Act: of course, the commissioner, powerful an individual as he or she inevitably is, nevertheless, they cannot act in an ultra vires manner\u2014that is, to say in a way that\u2019s outside the law of the land\u2014and nor should we have in tax legislation, so far as possible, \u201CHenry VIII\u201D provisions where we\u2019d simply allow, in effect, the primary legislations provisions to be changed in a way that doesn\u2019t reflect the will of Parliament, as evidenced, for example, through the committee of the whole House process.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000792\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the 20 percent threshold or the deductibility that kicks in, in terms of Investment Boost, my understanding is there\u2019s no prospect of double-dipping, but if there\u2019s any further to say on that, then I\u2019m sure my colleague and friend, the revenue Minister himself, will be sure to provide that to you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000793\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e7cbd35bcaf9d9e18fe31d74995ae5b4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m going to call Tom Rutherford on the trust that this is a genuine call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022 data-id=\u0022e1f8f867e66c4557cf985eec2e3ce844\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000794\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cb40eb85aab340879622563050ab25fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e1f8f867e66c4557cf985eec2e3ce844\u0022\u003ETOM RUTHERFORD (National\u2014Bay of Plenty) (20:59)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u00226ed3c4246bfc0ceb3e44c43bb568e21e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000795\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226ed3c4246bfc0ceb3e44c43bb568e21e\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (20:59)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair, and mine is a very quick call. It is on clause 19, the residential supply of excess electricity, that my colleague has spoken to. Much like the clauses that sought to deal with digital nomads, this again is another clause that is trying to position our tax law to be relevant and deal with what is happening around us at the moment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000796\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe examples that are given in the commentary to the bill, I think, are quite useful. There\u2019s one which shows how it doesn\u2019t need to be complicated when we\u2019re dealing with a rental arrangement, around where the benefit would fall between the tenant and the landlord and the fact that the tenant wouldn\u2019t have to file for those purposes. But the question I have for the Minister of Revenue is: what would happen if that solar was instead via a virtual power plant working in a situation where there was, effectively, arbitrage going on, and that someone with a battery was actually selling back at a profit and doing it at quite a commercial scale, but it was on residential properties that, essentially, were using that for the purpose of generation. Is there a threshold where this would be seen as beyond the intent of the legislation, which is to simplify the rules for tenants and for landlords\u2014and it is something we utterly support, but we can see that there potentially could be a different way it would be used\u2014and whether or not the Minister received any advice on that, and whether that\u2019s something that he has asked his officials to ensure that there is some way of monitoring that that is not the case. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022 data-id=\u002227f4485b9ce2568264e6ef76e8744fbe\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000797\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002227f4485b9ce2568264e6ef76e8744fbe\u0022\u003EREUBEN DAVIDSON (Labour\u2014Christchurch East) (21:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. Madam Chair. I just want to circle back to clause 15, which we did\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000798\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a1567556a6bb9632b48a12d3f74cb0c1\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m not really in favour of going backwards. I\u2019ll allow you to do it this once and then the team needs to be organised about going forwards, OK?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000799\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221e0a5011d0846ce25bf5da3b831aacdf\u0022\u003EREUBEN DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. The reason that I\u2019m wanting to look at it is because there is, in that, an exclusion that says explicitly that this section does not apply to the income of a public entertainer. Whilst I applaud the moves to create a system that better supports digital nomads\u2014and that\u2019s quite a forward-looking, which you\u2019re a fan of, and future-focused industry initiative\u2014what it doesn\u2019t take into account is the crossover between public entertainers and digital nomads, and these are significant.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000800\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMany of the examples cited are around influencers or people who create content for digital platforms. While they\u2019re doing that, that content in its purest form would qualify for digital nomad consideration, and therefore the implications in this bill around the tax requirements. However, if they were to host or be present at public events where they provided a service\u2014potentially a ticketed service\u2014then all of a sudden, they arguably have become a public entertainer, but they could also fall under the category of a digital nomad. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000801\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhere that becomes even more murky is that some of these people wouldn\u2019t see the genre or the content that they\u2019re creating, online or in real life at ticketed events, as being entertainment. They could in fact see it as being commentary; they could see it as being news and current affairs analysis, or news and current affairs, as simple as that. All of a sudden, they\u2019re no longer a public entertainer as such, but they are still arguably falling into the exclusion category from the digital nomad category that was explicitly set up to support them. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000802\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo the questions, really, for the Minister of Revenue are: who decides whether someone is a public entertainer or, for want of a better term, a digital nomad; what happens when someone is both; and what advice, if any, or reports did he get to understand how many times this might happen, how many people it will affect, and the amount of work that would be required to operate, essentially, a split system between the newly proposed digital nomad taxation structure versus the established public entertainment structure?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022bed777a30720f79c7ddc6ff959822eff\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000803\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bed777a30720f79c7ddc6ff959822eff\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (21:04)\u003C/span\u003E: A couple of quick answers to the questions in regard to that. \u201CPublic entertainer\u201D is a defined term within the Income Tax Act, so the member can look at that when he reads the legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000804\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe question around solar\u2014the question was around thresholds. The way in which we looked at that is \u201CIs that a business?\u201D Well, the exemption around income tax is simplistic, but if a business wants to be able to, on the other side, claim deductions for the capital cost of the equipment and such as that, then it would be, in effect, subject to income tax on the revenue gained from the electricity that it exports back into the grid. So it\u2019s either one or the other, and most businesses, such as farms, will be taxable entities and therefore claim a deduction and therefore pay tax. For everyone else\u2014normal residential households\u2014they\u2019ll be exempt. That keeps it very simple, because we want to encourage more residential solar and batteries across New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u00226139ce964cba5f8aad252fe006f9c6bd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000805\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226139ce964cba5f8aad252fe006f9c6bd\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (21:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you to the Minister for his answers. I\u2019d like to thank the Minister who was previously in the chair, the Hon Chris Penk, for his answers, and I say to the Minister of Revenue, who is currently in the chair, that the Minister who was previously in the chair did a very good job. But we did want to wait to discuss the Amendment Paper 560 until the Minister, who is currently in the chair, was actually back in the chair, so, at this stage, we want to move on to discuss Amendment Paper 560. Now, for the benefit of my colleagues, I put 590 on my notes; it\u2019s actually 560.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000806\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fdc3021f35654a841cceb86f285eaaf9\u0022\u003EHon Dr Megan Woods\u003C/span\u003E: We know what you mean.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000807\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f3ae7547318400394d7d517680d16383\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Great, thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000808\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is a really important Amendment Paper, and the reason it\u2019s important is that is the Amendment Paper that puts in place the Government\u2019s move to increase support for families by a $50 boost to the in-work tax credit. The particular policy change was announced, I think, on Tuesday. We know the legislation\u2019s come through today. This is the one opportunity this committee has to examine the policy behind this change and to work through some of the possible wrinkles in it. We do have a number of quite technical questions, which we will get to, particularly from people who are very, very familiar with the way that these tax credits work. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000809\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of Amendment Paper 560, my understanding is\u2014and people, I\u2019m sure, will correct me if wrong\u2014this basically increases the in-work tax credit by $50 a week for a year or\u2014and this is announced as policy though it\u2019s not in the legislation\u2014until the price of 91 petrol is below $3 a litre for\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000810\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229a60bbd77efa3f064e243194aa193fcc\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EFour weeks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000811\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222d56a64413f3819e50db3bb52ccbd207\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014four weeks in a row. So there\u2019s a whole set of questions around that. The idea is to just increase support at a time when we know that fuel prices are increasing. Time limit is an obvious thing to do for this and to make it very clear that it\u2019s a time-limited benefit. The $50 increase will be in place until the earlier of 1\u00A0April\u00A02027 or that date set by Order in Council.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000812\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are a set of questions around that threshold of $3 a litre for four weeks\u2014it\u2019s 91 octane. But what we need to know is where that\u2019s going to be measured. As we know, for those of us who use the Gaspy app, we can actually see the price of petrol up and down the country, and it varies substantially around the country. Apparently, the cheapest station is the Gull station in Mangawhai; interesting to know. There\u2019s also a very cheap one down on State Highway 1, as well, and things like that. But the petrol price can vary across petrol stations. That below $3 a litre, is that just one station in one place at one four-week period, or is it an average across the country? There is a set of questions in there which I think New Zealanders will want to know the answer to, and this is the one opportunity we\u2019ve got to get this answer\u2014from a Minister\u2014as to just exactly how that $3 a litre is going to be judged. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000813\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESensibly, they said it\u2019s on 91; that is, I think, a reasonable compromise between the price of diesel and the price of 95. But just how, exactly, is that going to be judged? That\u2019s the first question to the Minister. My colleagues have other questions. It\u2019s also $3 for four weeks, but if there\u2019s a four-week period ticking along and it goes above $3 for just one day, is that enough to reset the clock? These are serious questions; people will need to know them for their own planning. I\u2019m looking forward to the answers from the Minister. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022edbe1299042d126a4bfd60d77ce11baa\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000814\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022edbe1299042d126a4bfd60d77ce11baa\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (21:09)\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, very happy to answer that question. The member the Hon Dr Deborah Russell may be aware that Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE), at the moment\u2014which is the lead agency in regards to providing advice around fuel security\u2014has mechanisms to capture, in effect, the average price of fuel across the different liquid fuels available in New Zealand; in this case, 91 octane. MBIE will be calculating that information and providing that information through for consideration. It will take, in effect, an average based on all of the fuel outlets across the country in the context of determining that price.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000815\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn regards to the timeline, the advice around four weeks is a reasonable period of rebalancing. We have to acknowledge that there\u2019s a lot of volatility out there at the moment, but a four-week period of stability under that threshold would indicate a structural reset of the price point, which, on that basis, means that the temporary intervention is no longer required.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00228b67fe4e547956fc8811e1527b233f91\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000816\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228b67fe4e547956fc8811e1527b233f91\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (21:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Following on from the initial questions by the Hon Dr Deborah Russell, I think this is a good time for us to sort of examine this part at length, noting that this particular amendment, Amendment Paper 560, has no departmental disclosure statement. It also doesn\u2019t have a regulatory impact statement, and it does affect people quite significantly. While I do understand the context in which this is being brought to the committee of the whole House, the question that we ask initially, when we\u2019re looking at any sort of policy decision, is what is the policy basis for something like this in terms of both the scope of this particular policy, but also in terms of the amount?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000817\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things we want to check is: if we have a situation where the child impact statement was conducted, would the increase of $50 a week meet the requirement of a child impact statement where children would not be further disadvantaged as a result of this? Was there any demographic analysis in terms of whether this is going to be equitably applied to different groups of people? As we know, when it comes to something like this, M\u0101ori, Pasifika, migrant communities, refugees, disabled communities, rainbow communities, etc., are most likely going to be affected by something like this. I would like to know, in lieu of having no additional information, if the Minister of Revenue minds walking us through some of the intent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000818\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELooking at the specific amount\u2014this, in particular, is an adjustment to section MD 10 of the Income Tax Act. I\u2019m looking at clause 79C of Amendment Paper 560 inserting new section MF 4L(3)(a)(ii) and MF 4L(3)(b). The reason I pick up on those is that if we are looking at this starting on 1 April 2026, the $5,070 and also the $780 is crossing over from what we see in the existing section MD 10. Therefore, that amount as a baseline has not been adjusted to the Consumers Price Index or any form of inflation, which means it is not $50 a week; it\u2019s less than that because, naturally, you would assume that you would be adjusting that\u2014I would hope. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000819\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things that the Minister mentioned today in her answers to oral questions is that the increase, if you\u2019re looking at normal adjustment, is $12 for an individual and maybe $20 for a couple\u2014noting that couples are more severely punished as a result of this. The question is: if that is the case for an individual\u2014let\u2019s ask another question: is the $50 a singles\u2019 rate or a couples\u2019 rate? Further to that, if the $50 is a singles\u2019 rate, that\u2019s an effective increase of only $38 if you consider inflation. Would that be a correct assumption? I\u2019m going to leave it there as to those broader questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022 data-id=\u0022aa10e93d1524641ce03f25cbfd5e87e1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000820\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aa10e93d1524641ce03f25cbfd5e87e1\u0022\u003EHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Deputy Leader\u2014Labour) (21:13)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. It\u2019s great to have the opportunity to take a call. One of the things that we are very cognisant of is that when you change anything with Working for Families, there are often interactions. One of the interactions that we\u2019re concerned about is the accommodation supplement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000821\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI\u2019m going to keep this very brief: I\u2019m wanting to know from the Minister of Revenue how many people out of the 143,000 who are set to gain from the $50 a week\u2014or the supposed $50 a week\u2014are actually going to have their accommodation supplement deducted as a result of the increase to the in-work tax credit? I\u2019m also wanting to know from the Minister if there are any other interactions with other parts of the system where there will be deductions made. Perhaps, on one hand, yes, the in-work tax credit is going to go up, but, on the other hand, people will lose something like a percentage or a proportion of their accommodation supplement. Therefore, I\u2019m also wanting to know how many of the 143,000 people that the Minister of Finance has said are set to gain $50 a week will actually gain the $50 a week. I can imagine that many of these low-income working households are actually eligible for the accommodation supplement because of the wage band that they fall in, so I\u2019m just trying to get some transparency on the actual amount that they will receive and whether there are any other interactions where they could potentially lose that we need to know about in the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u00228a40892bab96f2b2a8cef0c282333713\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000822\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228a40892bab96f2b2a8cef0c282333713\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (21:15)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. My questions for the Minister of Revenue also pertain to Amendment Paper 560, given that this is a very serious topic. I thank the Minister for answering questions\u2014because we will have a few of them, which is to be expected.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000823\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy questions are around the thresholds that are set through the Order in Council. We know that this measure is going to be in place for a year or if there is a sustained period of petrol being priced over $3 a litre. My questions are: what happens within that 12-month period if we experience flows in and out, over and above that $3 threshold? I note that the Minister has also said that the four-week period is probably enough for us to say there\u2019s been a structural shift in the price of petrol, but what happens if, over those 12 months\u2014it\u2019s conceivable\u2014we see three or four cycles of this that go over the four-week period? Is it the intent of the Government that every time we go over that threshold this will start again, or is it a one-time measure, and the first time that we come out of the period of more than four weeks below $3 a litre, the measure will be taken off the table? Or will it just be triggered each time we have that, and what is the plan around that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000824\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other question is, of course, that none of these triggers or thresholds are in the legislation. This is to be done through Order in Council, through a different instrument, so I think it\u2019s very important that the committee considers this really carefully at this point. One of the things I\u2019d like to know is: has the Cabinet and have Ministers discussed whether or not there could be changes to the $3 trigger that is going to sit within the regulations? Is there a scenario that Ministers have discussed where it could be that, OK, we come out of one, we might raise that to $3.50, for example, for the next period\u2014that you\u2019ve got to go X number of weeks with petrol at that level of price before we bring this measure back into place? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000825\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECould it be that Ministers have discussed that if we\u2019ve got a period of time where petrol has only gone down to $2.97, there\u2019s actually not much more relief for families, and it\u2019s an on/off switch with this measure? If it\u2019s just slightly below $3, there isn\u2019t that support for families or for the people who are going to benefit from it. Have Ministers discussed whether or not a sustained period of time just below the threshold that they\u2019ve set may mean that Ministers do seek to change that through the mechanism they have through the Order in Council?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00226c0094d7cc39315060713912d2d039f8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000826\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226c0094d7cc39315060713912d2d039f8\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (21:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks very much, Madam Chair. Just in regards to the question from the member in regards to the criteria that will be put in place in regards to the payment, the legislation and the amendment that is putting through this tax bill is only, in effect, a one-way trigger. What that means is that in a scenario where we go from where we are to a period where the fuel price is sustained at a rate below $3 a litre for a period of four weeks, at that point, that will crystallise a decision point around a stop date.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000827\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIf a stop date occurs and then, subsequently, we move back into a threshold where the fuel price is sustained over $3, then, in effect, we will be into a scenario where it will require further legislation to, in effect, trigger a consideration around whether this payment mechanism is reintroduced or not. The purpose of this is very targeted in the context of temporary relief, based on the fuel prices we have put in place in the legislation scenario, and we will need to reassess that, as you would expect, depending on the circumstances that are around.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u00224ef91e949dacc459bd8baf93cab7b046\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000828\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224ef91e949dacc459bd8baf93cab7b046\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (21:20)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, and I thank the Minister of Revenue for those answers. I think that\u2019s useful information that we\u2019ve learnt about how this is going to operate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000829\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMy follow-up question from that is: what additional measures are being put in place, other than what\u2019s already there, in terms of the Commerce Commission and the fuel price monitoring of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, to ensure that there isn\u2019t a perverse incentive for fuel companies to, say, keep the price of fuel at $3.01, which will mean that this additional income flows to families, with the idea that they may, in their calculations, decide that there will be more money available for people to fill up their cars, and that they will sell more of their product if that money is kept flowing? What will be the additional monitoring mechanisms that will be put in place to ensure that that is not the case?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022c4e139d9b2cb19f4ffe7352905fe0abe\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000830\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c4e139d9b2cb19f4ffe7352905fe0abe\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (21:21)\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, and the Minister for Energy\u2014being myself\u2014have already clearly indicated to the broader fuel market that the regulator, which is the Commerce Commission, is monitoring pricing and ensuring that it is appropriate, in accordance with the costs that fuel companies incur. That mechanism is already in place, and as part of that process, we expect that the regulator will be monitoring this situation to deal with the scenario which the member has set out at this point. We don\u2019t have any evidence to indicate that fuel companies are responding in that way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000831\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e12ce73cc16b689f6fff0150ee865329\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Carmel Sepuloni. I want to make sure the questions we have now are still related to the Amendment Paper 560, and that\u2019s fine. I just don\u2019t want to move on to something else and then go back.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022 data-id=\u00228b5c761f5e57ac3e2e561301102bfdbd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000832\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228b5c761f5e57ac3e2e561301102bfdbd\u0022\u003EHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Deputy Leader\u2014Labour) (21:22)\u003C/span\u003E: No, I\u2019m definitely still related to the Amendment Paper 560 because I haven\u2019t got a response from the Minister of Revenue yet on the question around the accommodation supplement, and any other interaction\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000833\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224711cf5e2ba2afaf0fdfd70364328a4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: He\u2019s just waiting for some advice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000834\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022035e86784a7254aebea7b11d1c8066ea\u0022\u003EHon CARMEL SEPULONI\u003C/span\u003E: Well, just to elaborate on that particular issue whilst the Minister is waiting for some advice, I think it is important to note for the committee\u2014and I\u2019m sure the Minister has got this information\u2014that the accommodation supplement is abated at 25 percent when their income is above the income threshold. There is, of course, the risk that the $50 a week will push people beyond that threshold, which then, of course, means that they have their accommodation supplement deducted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000835\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to be really clear about what I\u2019m asking for. I believe the Minister of Finance has said 143,000 people are set to gain $50 per week from the increase to the in-work tax credit; I want to know how many of them are likely to be receiving the accommodation supplement and therefore have a deduction from their accommodation supplement as a result of the increase to the in-work tax credit. Alongside that, I want to know from the Minister, then, the exact number of people who will actually receive $50 additional each week, taking into consideration that for many there will be a deduction from the accommodation supplement. I think it\u2019s important just to have that transparency, because some of the families out there who have heard this through the media will be thinking that they will be $50 per week better off, not knowing that the interactions that occur with the system, including the accommodation supplement, means that that won\u2019t actually be the case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000836\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust to add to that question, though, it would be interesting to know what the offset is here. The Minister has said, I believe, that it\u2019s going to cost the Government around $333\u00A0million for the increase to the in-work tax credit, but clearly there will be an offset, because they will be saving money from the accommodation supplement side of things, and potentially other interactions. I would also like to know what the Government is saving from those offsets.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000837\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226aa352839fa6c1f49a5a8698b1b26efb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Just before I take the Hon Willow-Jean Prime\u2019s question, I just want to remind the people to my right that this is the first time today that the Opposition have actually seen this Amendment Paper 560, and it\u2019s an Amendment Paper that is new on the Table, and I want to make sure that these questions are fleshed out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u0022ae64944a76f3f327980848251bc89fa6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000838\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ae64944a76f3f327980848251bc89fa6\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (21:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for that point that you make. I want to say that, because there is no regulatory impact statement, there are some questions and some details that we are particularly interested in. I support the contribution that has been made by the Hon Carmel Sepuloni about the accommodation supplement. But what I also want to ask the Minister of Revenue about is to understand what advice the Minister was given about people who work and receive a benefit. Yep, that\u2019s right\u2014they work part-time and they receive part of a benefit. The Government is framing this income support as being about supporting low-income workers\u2014that\u2019s been done through the in-work tax credit\u2014and that it goes to low-income working families with children, but what is often overlooked is that many people on benefit are actually working. You can be working 20 to 30 hours a week and still be getting a part-benefit, and therefore you are not eligible for the Government\u2019s support here. These are low-income families with children who are working and receiving a part-benefit, and we assume they will not be eligible, because they are on a benefit, for this Government\u2019s support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000839\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ESo the question I want to ask the Minister is: what advice did they get around those families? I also want to know how many low-income workers there are who are on the part-benefit who are missing out\u2014they are working, they have children. So how many are working part-time, have children, but are going to be missing out on this? Can I please have the Minister\u2019s answer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022602cd0737bbe251d2399a972673ef233\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000840\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022602cd0737bbe251d2399a972673ef233\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (21:27)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, thanks, members, for those questions. You\u2019ll appreciate that we\u2019re currently reviewing the income tax legislation. The accommodation supplement is administered by Work and Income, which is the Ministry of Social Development, which is outside of the scope of this legislation. The questions in regards to numbers of individuals would need to be answered through that agency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000841\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIt would be fair to say, and I just want to remind members, that the benefit we\u2019ve outlined relates to 143,000 families, and obviously there is a different composition in the context of families across the board and those around the eligibility. I\u2019m not being difficult; I\u2019m simply recognising that the answers to the questions you\u2019re asking are not within the scope of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u00220adac7b842c5467df8cb56096e97edf1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000842\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220adac7b842c5467df8cb56096e97edf1\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (21:28)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is to the Minister of Revenue. Given his answer, what advice has he had on the interaction between the in-work tax credit for those families who are also receiving either a main line benefit or one of the other supplements, given that I assume that he\u2019s well aware, and he would have received this advice before, that those two things offer people who are working, and who also receive support, two different options about what their support is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000843\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHis Government has chosen here to put money into one side of that equation. That is, a side of the equation which will affect probably thousands of families, because they will be better off moving on to the in-work tax credit and away from the benefit. That might be a policy decision that he has made, but he owes the committee an account of how he made that decision and how many people are affected by that. Because if there are thousands of families\u2014like my friend Holly, who messaged me today about whether she would be better off moving on to the in-work tax credit\u2014there are people who are affected by that decision right now, and this is a temporary support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000844\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHis Government isn\u2019t proposing to spend $373 million in every year; it is, in fact, proposing to do that in a temporary way. So those people who are wondering whether it\u2019s better for them to move on to the in-work tax credit and receive the benefit that the Government is putting into that side, without any regard to those people who are also receiving support and are working just as many hours, and really, really hard, and not getting ahead\u2014why do they not receive this support?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000845\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf that is his policy decision, then he should defend it. He should tell this committee why he wants those thousands of people to move on to this different kind of tax credit because he thinks that\u2019s worthy and good\u2014but it\u2019s temporary, so they should then look 12 months down the line and move back on to some other form of support. Why is it that he has made that policy decision\u2014with no regulatory impact statement and no departmental disclosure\u2014about how many people are in that situation and what the effect on their income will be at the end of the week? Why won\u2019t he account to this committee about why he has made that decision? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000846\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also have some questions about how many young people are affected by this. Minister, have you asked your officials what the impact of this decision will be on the child poverty targets and what the impacts will be when it dries up? This support also accounts for much of the support that you committed at the time of the election, in National\u2019s fiscal plan, to put money and investment into those things which actually materially improve child poverty in New Zealand. This has used up that funding. This might be the decision that the Government has made, but the committee is owed an account of why there have been decisions made which will impact on the child.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000847\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWill this improve the child poverty targets? It might, in fact, because more money is going to some of those families, and that is a good thing. What happens when it dries up? What happens at the end of this policy, when you\u2019ve used that money and not got in targeted support for those children who do have the impact of child poverty in their lives every day? We all have signed up to targets that we wish to change and improve, and this Government has made changes to them to suit its decisions and its trajectory on those. Even still, even if we take this Government\u2019s child poverty targets, we should understand how this decision is going to impact those and who the children are and what households are going to miss out because of this decision and the prioritisation of this particular impact on the in-work family tax credit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022 data-id=\u0022bf44778c5a4d498ff81fb6975765a4d5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000848\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bf44778c5a4d498ff81fb6975765a4d5\u0022\u003EHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Deputy Leader\u2014Labour) (21:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just reflecting on the Minister of Revenue\u2019s answer, previously, about the accommodation supplement, saying that that is the responsibility of the Ministry of Social Development and out of scope in relation to this bill; I actually find that inconceivable, having been a Minister for social development, having worked with the Minister of Revenue, and knowing full well that advice goes to Inland Revenue on the impact of any changes and where there will be interactions that see a reduction in support in other areas. I need to ask the Minister: is he telling this committee that, at no point, has he received advice from the Minister or Ministry of Social Development on the impact that the increase in the in-work tax credit would have on the accommodation supplement? I find that very difficult to\u2014I don\u2019t want to say\u2014believe, but I\u2019d be very concerned if the ministries were not sharing that advice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000849\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to point out that although the Minister of Revenue is in charge of this legislation, it does have to go to Cabinet, and sitting around the table is a Minister for social development who, surely, is giving voice to the social development side of things and, in this instance, to the impact that an increase in the in-work tax credit would have on the accommodation supplement. I am also surprised\u2014or would be surprised\u2014if the Minister of Finance was not aware that there would be a reduction of the accommodation supplement when the in-work tax credit was increased. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000850\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are lots of questions about the Minister and his engagement with the relevant Ministers and ministries. I don\u2019t think that it\u2019s fair or acceptable to say that any interactions between Working for Families and the Ministry for Social Development is out of scope of this legislation given the impact on these families.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u00222ed7c148bf1d2ed145b7c4de4c721fc1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000851\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222ed7c148bf1d2ed145b7c4de4c721fc1\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (21:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Look, I appreciate the member\u2019s observation from her background and experience, but the reality is that there is and there will be a potential impact on the accommodation supplement if someone is in receipt of the accommodation supplement and the in-work tax credit. However, the assessment is it\u2019s considered to be very rare because of the reality that one needs to be, in effect, off the benefit to be able to receive the in-work tax credits.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000852\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI\u2019m not intending to be difficult in the context of this point, but the member is asking questions which are outside my ministerial accountability and responsibility. They are best directed to the Minister of social development in that context. I am acknowledging\u2014as we are aware\u2014there is an interaction. However, the assessment in the context of the advice that I\u2019ve received is that that circumstance, which has been questioned here, is a circumstance that is rare.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022 data-id=\u002211453a549f60c91f5af074a2e974d33b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000853\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022083a816abbb847f0a99aff178b1bbba2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002211453a549f60c91f5af074a2e974d33b\u0022\u003EHon CARMEL SEPULONI (Deputy Leader\u2014Labour) (21:35)\u003C/span\u003E: I am not sure why that Minister of Revenue thinks that it would be rare for the families in the income bracket who receive the in-work tax credit to receive the accommodation supplement, given that, actually, it\u2019s not just beneficiaries that receive the accommodation supplement and that there is a much higher threshold for being able to access it and that many low to middle income households are eligible for the accommodation supplement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000854\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI wanted to know from the Minister actually how many are eligible for the accommodation supplement, but I understand, given he has not received any advice from the Minister for social development or the Ministry of Social Development, that he probably doesn\u2019t have those figures. My understanding\u2014and this is something that we\u2019ll go away and check and that he might want to, as well\u2014is that over 500,000 New Zealanders have access to the accommodation supplement. Now, that\u2019s quite high, and many of them will fall within that bracket that receive the in-work tax credit. I don\u2019t know where he got the understanding from that it would be a rare situation for these 143 families who get the in-work tax credit to be eligible for the accommodation supplement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000855\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI was also going to just say, in regard to that, that there\u2019s always the option of stating in legislation that certain other grants would be precluded from being counted and so, therefore, wouldn\u2019t be reduced. I wanted to ask the Minister whether or not there was any consideration given to these areas where there may be an interaction like the accommodation supplement of explicitly stating in the legislation that the temporary increase to the in-work family tax credit would not impact or reduce that particular grant.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022b5ff73c004cb1fe86443a4fb365a6ebb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b5ff73c004cb1fe86443a4fb365a6ebb\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (21:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Minister, for the response. We also recognise that because this is something that is quite new and because it takes the Minister a little while just to get the full advice to get back to us, I do appreciate the Minister of Revenue doing that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000857\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to check some of the questions I had for the Minister before, and I\u2019m looking specifically at the calculation question. In lieu of anything else, what we can go on is, potentially, the ministerial statement that\u2019s been made and the FAQs for this particular piece and the fact sheet. The Minister constantly mentions this is calculated on a family based income and that there\u2019s a minimum amount of family based income, but I want to first check with the Minister if he wouldn\u2019t mind explaining how that works with how the calculation eligibility criteria itself first works. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000858\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the reason I mentioned that is new section MF 4L inserted by clause 79C that we are looking at in Amendment Paper 560 is an extension of section MD10 of the Income Tax Act. But MD10 is the calculation, whereas the eligibility criteria is earlier than that. I think, from memory, it is MD 4 to MD 9. In MD 4(2) of the Income Tax Act, it does mention that \u201CIf 2 persons are entitled to an in-work tax credit or a child tax credit for a child for an entitlement period, the entitlement of each is not affected by the entitlement of the other person.\u201D Does that mean that they should be calculated individually rather than as a family? What is the definition of the interaction of MD 4(2) here with what is being proposed here or with the general in-work tax credit system? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000859\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing the Minister mentioned as well\u2014and this is also in the fact sheet\u2014is that the in-work tax credit is going to be paid to around 143,000 people. I know there were questions by the previous speaker, the Hon Carmel Sepuloni, in terms of that particular number. Are we expecting 143,000 people to get the full entitlement increase, which is $50 a week for 52 weeks? Or is it that only 143,000 people will receive a version of that for X period of time\u2014anything from one week up to 52 weeks within a year? Are we looking at the whole 143,000 people receiving the entire amount for entirety of the year; if not, what is the average number of weeks that those 143,000 people are on the in-work tax credit for?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022109e9475a24bb1dca3259c5554f38bf2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000860\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022109e9475a24bb1dca3259c5554f38bf2\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (21:41)\u003C/span\u003E: I will just answer that point. The member\u2019s question was in regard to whether individuals receive either a portion of it or the full entitlement on an annualised basis. It is the reality that when the 143,000 families\u2019 number is calculated, it does take into account that some of those families will only receive the in-work tax credit for part of the year. They could receive the additional $50, but not the full $2,600 for the year. The reality is that that\u2019s because there will be families and individuals within those families that move from the main benefit to full-time work partway through the year. Also, the reality is that families with dependent children who turn 18 years or older become no longer relevant because of that. All of those interactions are happening within a family unit. The calculation of 143,000 is a forecast of that, in effect, complex dynamic of the different ways in which those aspects will change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000861\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere was a question earlier in regard to child poverty. Child poverty was not modelled, but we do know, based on the most recent figures by Stats NZ, that approximately half of all children in material hardship, around 81,000, are in working households, and the targeting of this intervention through the in-work tax credit targets those that are working. Obviously, not all of these children will be in households that are eligible for the in-work tax credit, as some of the families in material hardship have incomes above the Working for Families threshold as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000862\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELastly, there was a question asking if there is a change to the eligibility criteria. No, it\u2019s just the rate change, which we\u2019ve outlined.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000863\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a4252074ca66aa6ee4b1a8a9afd45af\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m going to take a question from the Hon Dr Megan Woods. I think we are traversing the Amendment Paper quite well at the moment, so I think we\u2019re nearly at the end of that. We are looking at anything post - page 25 and the clauses after that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022 data-id=\u0022fb2d1ea4f42b72807b1248162df74779\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000864\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fb2d1ea4f42b72807b1248162df74779\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour\u2014Wigram) (21:43)\u003C/span\u003E: My question does pertain to the Amendment Paper because I think\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000865\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc357f4ba94c71abb17874e354302441\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: As long as it\u2019s a new one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000866\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8e69b9c04ff07334fd324d35596468e\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014it is a new one\u2014that while we understand that, in exceptional times, Governments need to move quickly and make changes quickly, the fact that there is no regulatory impact statement with this amendment, which we\u2019ve only seen today, does mean there\u2019s a number of questions that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000867\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e3a68186992b347188f5a31c0841e562\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Fine, as long as they\u2019re new questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000868\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002254aa7c61326f4a0395e6e4031c554ba3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c52b3fc83bc522d88594f46fcce993f6\u0022\u003EHon Dr MEGAN WOODS\u003C/span\u003E: It is a new question, Madam Chair. One of the things that we are developing some concerns on, on this side of the Chamber, is the lack of questions that Cabinet and Ministers seem to have asked in terms of the intersection of the tax system with the Ministry for Social Development in terms of the abatement of the of the accommodation supplement and, perhaps, the lack of understanding the Minister in the chair is showing about the how the two things do intersect. Something else that we have concerns about is whether or not there has been information provided to Ministers and to Cabinet around the breakdown of those 143,000 people that will be receiving it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000869\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe know that there are a number of people who are relatively low paid but, none the less, rely on their cars in order to do their jobs. I\u2019m thinking of homecare and support workers who need to drive to each of their jobs. I\u2019m asking if any breakdown has been done about how many of our homecare and support workers will fall inside and outside of this. Likewise, in community nursing, there will be groups of people that could well fall outside of this assistance, but they\u2019re going to be required to use their vehicles in order to carry out their jobs. It\u2019s not only paid people, and I know that it has been a concern in other countries, listening to commentary. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000870\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat\u2019s going to happen to things like Meals on Wheels? Often, we have a large amount of volunteer work done by people who are retired and will not be eligible for this. If they are superannuitants, they fall outside of the eligibility, and I know that we are seeing concern about how it is that the volunteers are going to cope in these circumstances in terms of getting those meals to some of our most vulnerable people. That work is done by volunteers, at their own cost, using their own vehicles and using petrol. Has there been any consideration of some of these things, which I know, for example, the Australians have been talking about and considering? Has New Zealand considered that at all?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000871\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI did have a follow-up question around the monitoring question that the Minister did answer, and I thank the Minister for that answer. I appreciate that the Commerce Commission and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment will be doing their fuel monitoring, and I\u2019m not suggesting that, at the moment, there is any cause for concern about whether they\u2019re going to keep it at $3.01 a litre. Of course, many times there can be changes, and there are inadvertent and unforeseen consequences and perverse incentives that are put up to keep prices at a certain level. Has Cabinet given any thought to what additional monitoring might need to go in in that space. For example, will there be a red flag if petrol price stats are $3.01 a litre, to 2c, to 3c\u2014just over that amount\u2014for a sustained period of time? Would that raise a red flag that would require some more in-depth monitoring by those agencies?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000872\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe last question I have for the Minister is around the fact that he said he hasn\u2019t received advice from MSD, but I would expect, as my colleague the Hon Carmel Sepuloni did, that at both the Cabinet committee and at Cabinet that there would have been a broad-ranging discussion when those Ministers would have fed in from their agencies\u2019 perspectives. I also would like to know whether Treasury gave some advice on the net costs around this, because certainly, from our experience, Treasury usually is pretty quick with that advice around the net cost of policies in terms of what the savings are going to be in terms of expenditure like this and whether or not Ministers asked for that advice from Treasury.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u002270b12f653dafb6d4c9d6bb5d840386c8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000873\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002270b12f653dafb6d4c9d6bb5d840386c8\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (21:48)\u003C/span\u003E: In terms of this Amendment Paper I have a completely new question to ask. I\u2019m hoping that we\u2019ll get through the Amendment Paper tonight and we can return to the rest of Part 2 tomorrow morning. In terms of this extra $50 a week, I want to bring the Minister of Revenue\u2019s attention to a possible interaction within his own department that is going to matter here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000874\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat is to do with the amount of inadvertent debt that individuals end up in because of the way that the in-work tax credit and other Working for Families tax credits operate. We know that a large part of the way these credits operate is that families have to estimate their income and depending on what that estimate is they are given an idea of how much their Working for Families tax credits will be. If they get that estimate wrong, then they end up in a position of owing debt to Inland Revenue. It inadvertently occurred but they still owe the debt. The same thing happens when people move in and out of work. They move in and out of work and it means that their income fluctuates. It can take time for the Working for Families tax credits to capture. It happens in all sorts of ways, but that\u2019s a particular scenario where those credits do change around. A similar thing happens when relationships come apart or form and dissolve, or when new families are formed. It does have a big impact on the Working for Families tax credit. Now, this is happening already anyway, so let\u2019s be clear about this: this is an existing problem. But what\u2019s going to happen is, I think, this problem is going to be exacerbated by the extra $50 a week\u2014partially just because the amounts of money involved are going to increase. We are going to have more people getting into worse inadvertent debt situations because of the increase.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000875\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I don\u2019t think we should be stopping the increase\u2014let\u2019s be really clear about that\u2014but I do want to know from the Minister of Revenue what extra resources he is considering within his own department in order to help people deal with this likelihood of inadvertent debt. Is he considering extra staffing in this area to ensure that people understand how much they can get? Is he considering extra staffing in the call centres? We know we already have found people who will ring up week by week to find out how their Working for Families tax credits will be affected if they take on an extra few hours\u2019 work or not. It\u2019s a very live consideration for low-income families.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000876\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA couple of questions there for the Minister: the extent to which he has considered that problem of inadvertent tax debt\u2014which we still need a solution for\u2014and the problem as to whether or not he\u2019s considered extra staffing from within his department to actually deal with the queries that are going to start coming in about this and to deal with helping people to get through that inadvertent debt situation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022f330bd60971a6e387dc7f97a6c18bd28\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000877\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f330bd60971a6e387dc7f97a6c18bd28\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (21:51)\u003C/span\u003E: Thanks to the member the Hon Dr Deborah Russell for the question. Obviously, tax debt is a significant focus for the Minister of Revenue. The number is in the region of $10 billion or so, and if you add in social debt then it\u2019s up around $13 billion\u2014so it\u2019s not insignificant in its totality. The Government did increase investment in regards to compliance activities for IRD earlier in the term. The assessment by IRD in regards to this policy adjustment is that they will be able to manage the impact and the implications of this new policy within their baseline. That\u2019s because they\u2019ve identified mechanisms of savings through the very hard work that they undertake as an agency.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022aa2c3e82026763fa348934bf3628bee6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000878\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aa2c3e82026763fa348934bf3628bee6\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (21:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I actually just have one question for the Minister of Revenue, and this is specifically to do with the formula itself. This is new section MF 4L(3)(b) added by Amendment Paper 560, and I want to specifically focus on the formula for \u201Camount B is $780\u201D\u2014noting that, in section MD 10 of the Income Tax Act 2007, the amount has stayed the same in terms of $780 while we\u2019re seeing the initial amount has increased. Essentially, the amount that you get for every child after the third child has not increased as a result of this. Can I check with the Minister: why has \u201Camount B\u201D not also been adjusted to increase to the same proportion as what we\u2019re seeing with \u201Camount A\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000879\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThat is, essentially, my question because what it then means is, proportionally speaking, for every child after the third, you are actually getting proportionately less per child because every child after the third amount has not been adjusted. Just that one question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022612d84de6f8f24dd83a25eafa0c7eeda\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000880\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022612d84de6f8f24dd83a25eafa0c7eeda\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (21:53)\u003C/span\u003E: I just wanted to come back to the question around the accommodation supplement because it is an important point of clarification. I\u2019ve just got a little bit more advice from the Ministry of Social Development coming through, which has taken a bit more. It is important to clarify that Working for Families is not classified as income in the assessment of the accommodation supplement. I retract the word \u201Crare\u201D and say that it won\u2019t have any impact at all. I just wanted to clarify that point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022 data-id=\u0022492db0fb5c3bae6f65d6b8a68ba905cc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000881\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002229b8d22182614a1b8b6e8ef03bf61503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022492db0fb5c3bae6f65d6b8a68ba905cc\u0022\u003EHon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) (21:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I don\u2019t believe the Minister of Revenue answered my questions that I asked about what is the number of families with children who are working part-time and are also receiving part benefit\u2014the Minister is giving me a signal but I need the answer for the \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EHansard\u003C/span\u003E. What advice did you receive around those people, and what other support did you consider? These families have jobs to go to, to travel to. In fact, the Minister of Finance said yesterday\u2014and I quote\u2014\u201CI\u2019d also note working families face the obligation to get to and from work each day. Beneficiaries do not face that obligation.\u201D That is an inaccurate statement for this group of people. I want to know the number and what consideration was given for them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022 data-id=\u0022e3b4403c72e9280b7518f2eff4778afd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000882\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229fb4ce970d4f47d9853d2ea64ddc5b74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e3b4403c72e9280b7518f2eff4778afd\u0022\u003EHon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) (21:54)\u003C/span\u003E: As the member the Hon Willow-Jean Prime will be aware, people\u2019s circumstances change on a daily and ongoing basis. It\u2019s not reality that I\u2019m going to be able to give you a definitive number, because the reality is that because those circumstances do change, and whether they\u2019re in work tomorrow or they\u2019re out of work is different.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000883\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a445f26000108175247cc630909546ef\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the time has come for me to leave the Chair. The committee is suspended and will resume at 9 a.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000884\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterItalicsCentred\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 9.55 p.m. to 9 a.m. (Thursday)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000885\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022cc7e6666c5adf85aec594d46247416ff\u0022\u003EExtended Sitting\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000886\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ed2d2df82db6d52990ca752826fef003\u0022\u003EThursday, 26 March 2026\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000887\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c4b7a02a43b4fdfa269b4e57ddd3c7d0\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00225ad7324470031f0e31d898362dfea90d\u0022\u003ETaxation (Annual Rates for 2025\u201326, Compliance Simplification, and Remedial Measures) Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022dbc584e30233d10caf29c306c65d65b9\u0022\u003ECommittee of the Whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000890\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000891\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a716b405f2f2d4f286e9f61df6e86450\u0022\u003EPart 2 Amendments to Income Tax Act 2007, and Part A of Schedule 1 (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000892\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e0bbacf13612c17df6269beaa7e9d5ed\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Good morning, members. I hope we\u2019re all well rested. The committee is resumed on the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2025-26, Compliance Simplification, and Remedial Measures) Bill. When we were considering the bill last night, we were debating Part 2. This is the debate on clauses 4 to 106\u2014\u201CAmendments to Income Tax Act 2007\u201D\u2014and Part A of Schedule 1. Once again, the question is that Part 2 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022ff904c5eb5d911d140dba8279d922c48\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000893\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ff904c5eb5d911d140dba8279d922c48\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (09:00)\u003C/span\u003E: I just want to traverse briefly where we\u2019d gotten through to last night. We had worked our way through Part 2 to around about\u2014where am I up to?\u2014the sale of excess electricity, so that was clause 19.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000894\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn addition to that, we had spent a substantial amount of time on the Minister of Revenue\u2019s Amendment Paper 560. Now, that was a really important Amendment Paper. It was the one that introduced the assistance for families in this fuel crisis, giving them an extra $50 a week. As I\u2019ve previously stated, the Labour Party will be supporting that amendment, but that Amendment Paper has probably been done over now and it is time to move on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000895\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221f8f36070c77d0f6b60b40feb2bb6b1d\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s my advice and observation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000896\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0695e5ea116b14325c109c96b2a983b\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, indeed. I do want to outline what there is still to discuss in Part 2. There is a series of changes to the Investment Boost rules; there is a series of changes around the foreign investment fund and revenue account method rules; there\u2019s a series of changes around employee share schemes; and, very importantly, there\u2019s an entirely new Amendment Paper, as well. It arrived earlier this week\u2014Amendment Paper 559. There is a very substantial change in that Amendment Paper around infrastructure funding and the thin capitalisation rules for infrastructure funding. There are those major topics still to canvass in Part 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000897\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s a lot of work still to do in this and, in particular, that work on the Amendment Paper because, of course, that has not been through the Finance and Expenditure Committee. The select committee did some work on those thin capitalisation rules, but we did not have the legislation in front of us; we were just talking general policy. So, as I said, a lot of work to do in this section. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000898\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGoing back to where we left off, I want to go to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000899\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022356847ffc59c827b4075de541721ab1b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Just at this stage, given what the member has indicated about how much work there is to do, the back and forth nature would probably assist, rather than five-minute speeches on each part of it\u2014that would maybe indicate progress.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000900\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b8fb95dd62475664416f438e5f052dd3\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: That would be great, Mr Chair. Of course, that will depend on the Minister in the chair participating.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000901\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022791b03c4a9b9bd6939bb2e7413b7610c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: It takes two to tango.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000902\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220a605fbe6635c5ccea03f19c0807ddc2\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: I note that the Minister in the chair is not actually the Minister responsible for this bill, so that could be a little bit tricky at this stage\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000903\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220496ae365349a4c12655cbafa9cea4de\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY\u003C/span\u003E: Brought out the big guns\u2014impact player off the bench.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000904\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252d461e6409f72433b511b2b129a075c\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014though I\u2019m sure the Minister in the chair at the moment will, in fact, do his best. I\u2019m sure he\u2019s looking forward to every moment of tax conversation\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000905\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b2a60fdc90d0e277312f1f2c925c79d8\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, I put my hand up for this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000906\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c9e976863f9d1ffbd860975316a81f93\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and I\u2019m sure he\u2019ll be ably assisted by the officials who are there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000907\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f123ef1a21466f174726814c6502a358\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister will be aware that his voice does get picked up on the microphone, and it goes out\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000908\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002252f351f4a705eac841e9418a2f093274\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, I\u2019m all big for Hansard.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000909\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022877089c4a0fc2b65d76bf7fd617c0231\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Of course, if the Minister responsible for the bill is not here, it does make it rather difficult to have a whole lot of back and forth, but let\u2019s give this a go.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to start on clauses 33 to 35. These are a series of changes to the Investment Boost rules or the immediate write-off rules, the accelerated depreciation rules\u2014so the rules that were brought in on Budget night last year. We debated them at the time and, of course, the difficulty with legislation brought in on Budget night is that, again, it hasn\u2019t been through a select committee process, so it can be very hard. Try as they might for officials and drafters to get them perfect, it does take time to get tax rules sorted out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000911\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe first question I want to ask the Minister\u2014and given that we\u2019ve asked for the back and forth\u2014is what feedback the Minister and Inland Revenue were getting that made these amendments necessary. There would have been something that came up that triggered this, either from within Inland Revenue or from within the tax community that said, \u201CHey, you\u2019ve got to get this right.\u201D I\u2019d just like to know what feedback the Minister and Inland Revenue were getting. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000912\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf we\u2019re going to do a back and forth, we actually need the Minister to participate in this, and, as I\u2019ve said, there\u2019s a long way to go on this bill, so I\u2019m going to give the Minister a little bit of a chance right now. Is he able to answer the question as to what information or advice he was getting, and that Inland Revenue was getting, that made these changes necessary?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022 data-id=\u0022b0c81c521c19d3e2b30bdb9986b93183\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000913\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b0c81c521c19d3e2b30bdb9986b93183\u0022\u003ERYAN HAMILTON (National\u2014Hamilton East) (09:05)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000914\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a7ce3684dec18a341ea519652b08059f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Hamilton, just bearing in mind what you\u2019ve heard, bearing in mind what took place last night, you\u2019ll be aware there\u2019s quite a wee way to go here. I won\u2019t say you\u2019re trifling with the Chair, but just make sure the bill is in front of you and be following progress yourself, and then you might get some idea of where we are and the likely success of a closure motion. I might have to say that it\u2019s fairly early, given the progress we\u2019re making through the bill at the moment, and given the message from the Chair last night.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u002215aab77b1194266e60b655b6ebd9deb2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000915\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002215aab77b1194266e60b655b6ebd9deb2\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (09:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I am waiting. I\u2019m sure the officials who are there will be quickly drafting a response for the Minister. It is actually quite important to know where the information was coming from about the need to introduce these changes to these accelerated write-down rules.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000916\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to go to replacement section DI 4(a)(viii), inserted by clause 34B. Let me see if I can find exactly the right spot; it\u2019s quite interesting. What I want to know there is, it expands the meaning of \u201Cimprovement\u201D\u2014oh, yes, I\u2019ve found it here now. It expands the meaning of \u201Cimprovement\u201D and it extends it to all asset classes, including petroleum and mining development expenditure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000917\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn the original legislation, we just had the word \u201Cimprovement\u201D, so there could be an accelerated write-down for improvements, but now we\u2019ve actually changed that word \u201Cimprovement\u201D to \u201Calteration, extension, or repair\u201D. I\u2019m just asking what was going on there, what advice the Minister was getting, and what advice officials were getting that said that the word \u201Cimprovement\u201D wasn\u2019t sufficient and that we actually needed that rather clarified definition of what an improvement was to \u201Calteration, extension, or repair\u201D. If the Minister is able to answer that question \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000918\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENo? Well, in that case\u2014this is one of the frustrations. I know the Minister in the chair, the Hon Matt Doocey, is a good guy doing great work in his portfolio around mental health, but it would be helpful if we had the Minister who was responsible for this bill. I appreciate things happen, but it is very hard to discuss a bill and to take committee stage seriously if we cannot get responses from the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000919\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECarrying on from here, that need to look at improvement, alteration, extension, or repair\u2014if we go to new section DI 4B, and it\u2019s the \u201CTreatment of certain items as assets\u201D\u2014what it does is it says a person can get this accelerated write-down, this accelerated depreciation for farm development expenditure or an immediate write-off, and it extends that immediate write-off to farm development expenditure. It\u2019s got the definition of farm development expenditure: \u201Call petroleum development expenditure\u201D; all mining development expenditure incurred by a person\u201D; and \u201Can alteration, extension, or repair of an asset of the type in any section\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000920\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, this is kind of interesting because, of course, those development expenditure rules are sitting there in order that taxpayers who are developing an asset can capitalise that and they get, if I recall correctly, more immediate write-offs, but now they\u2019re going to get this accelerated depreciation, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000921\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo there are two questions here. The first question is: why was this type of expenditure\u2014the farm development expenditure, the petroleum development expenditure, the mining development expenditure\u2014not included in the accelerated write-downs in the first place? Actually, there are three questions. The second is: again, what advice was the Minister or officials getting that it was necessary to actually include this explicitly in the accelerated write-down rules?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000922\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe third question there is\u2014and this is where we need the officials\u2019 advice, because although I am familiar with tax, obviously, I haven\u2019t worked in it directly for eight years, so there\u2019s some stuff, the very keen detail, that I\u2019m not sure on. I\u2019m looking for some reassurance on this. I\u2019m assuming this doesn\u2019t allow a double deduction, but if I could get some clarity on whether or not that actually allows a double deduction. I\u2019m going to give the Minister an opportunity to answer some questions, if he so wishes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022 data-id=\u0022a2c97a1050e05b3b6a893d0074142f26\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000923\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a2c97a1050e05b3b6a893d0074142f26\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY (Minister for Mental Health) (09:10)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just to acknowledge the questions from the Hon Deborah Russell; she seems to be taking the lion\u2019s share of the work for the rest of her colleagues this morning. As pointed out, my portfolio is around mental health and what is the connection\u2014well, I suppose when the Opposition was in Government and called tax \u201Clove\u201D, then, obviously, we\u2019ve brought in some mental health support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000924\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E\u201CWhat feedback did IRD get that triggered this clarification?\u201D\u2014the Hon Deborah Russell asked about, referring to section 33. The advice I\u2019ve received involved full consultation with the tax community to understand the gaps in the legislation and an extension to second-hand good clarification required to provide certainty for investment decisions. Just to repeat that: full consultation with the tax community, clarificatory to give certainty\u2014and, I suppose, when we think about the Government side of the House, it is around giving confidence and giving certainty, because, I\u2019m sure you agree, we need to give certainty for investment decisions to be made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u002267f3608e1d99759c8ab5a79cd67a84eb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000925\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002267f3608e1d99759c8ab5a79cd67a84eb\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (09:11)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I just want to carry on a little bit there, because it says \u201Cfull consultation with the tax community\u201D. Now, I appreciate that this was Budget night legislation. These rules around accelerated depreciation came in on Budget night last year, and the nature of Budget legislation is such that it is kept reasonably quiet, because announcements need to be made. A further detail around this is that, of course, people who knew this legislation was coming could well have delayed asset purchases until they got the advantage of the accelerated write-down. But then the Minister talked about full consultation with the tax community. Now, that\u2019s an interesting discussion. Does this mean that there is a commitment within Inland Revenue and by the Minister around Budget legislation, or, indeed, any legislation that is introduced with little notice\u2014again, I appreciate the necessity to do that\u2014to doing ex-post reviews and ex-post consultation in order to ensure that the legislation really does meet the needs of the community?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022 data-id=\u0022f30c843e8c55e7c5b6d5a012e3996771\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000926\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f30c843e8c55e7c5b6d5a012e3996771\u0022\u003EREUBEN DAVIDSON (Labour\u2014Christchurch East) (09:13)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and thank you to the Minister for the time in the hot seat this morning and to answer some of the questions, and there will be many coming from this side of the House as we work our way through what is a very long and complex bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000927\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, the question I have relates to clause 34D, \u201CSection DI 5 amended (New investment asset deduction)\u201D. Really, the issue I have with this question and with the section I want to get to is\u2014as the Minister himself has expressed, he is not an expert in the area of tax; my sense is that there are a lot of New Zealanders who are not. For that very reason, understanding exactly what is in here and how that will impact New Zealanders who don\u2019t necessarily take the time to read through the entire Act would suggest that, actually, our job here is to understand and interpret a lot of this content so that it\u2019s much easier for New Zealanders to understand the ramifications and, indeed, for all of us to understand the ramifications around the decisions we make about whether or not we support this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000928\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EComing to the specific subclause (1AC) in clause 35, in section DI 6, where it says it\u2019s inserting as subsection (2)\u2014and I just want to read the passage here: \u201CFor the purposes of subsection (1), if the amount of person A\u2019s deduction is less than the amount (the available deduction amount)\u201D\u2014it goes on\u2014\u201Cthey would have been allowed if they had used the asset wholly in deriving assessable income or carrying on a business for the purpose of deriving assessable income,\u201D. Thankfully, there\u2019s a bracket at this point, which allows me to catch my breath. The passage goes on: \u201Cthe applicable amount referred to in subsection (1) is reduced by the available deduction amount for the purposes of quantifying the amount of depreciation loss under subpart EE or the amount of a deduction under subpart DO, DP, DT, or DU, as applicable.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000929\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is a very simple question about what is, essentially, a very complicated series of words in the bill, which really is: what does that mean in plain English, and can the Minister give us an assurance not just that he understands it but that we are all able to understand it and that, most importantly, the New Zealanders for whom this will apply are able to understand exactly what that means?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u002230e2d7875a5575c1dcbd95e4113422b8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000930\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002230e2d7875a5575c1dcbd95e4113422b8\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (09:16)\u003C/span\u003E: I do want to go to a couple of very specific questions now. They will be my last questions on this part, and I hope the Minister in the chair, the Hon Matt Doocey, is\u2014sorry, this section, before I move on to the next major topic of employee share schemes. But I want to understand, in particular, the policy decision around DI 4B(b) and (c). This is new section DI 4B, subsection (b) and subsection (c), inserted by clause 34C. Now, we\u2019ve been allowed a deduction for development expenditure. I just want to remind the Minister that he hasn\u2019t yet answered my questions on development expenditure in general, and so I would appreciate an answer on those. But DI 4B(b) and (c) give accelerated write-downs for all petroleum development expenditure and all mining development expenditure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000931\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, there is, of course, a broader question around this, and that is to do with, certainly in the case of petroleum development expenditure, whether we should be encouraging petroleum development expenditure in our Income Tax Act, given the pressing needs of climate change. There\u2019s a policy decision taken here in the tax Act to support fossil fuels. I get the reason for consistency within the tax Act, but could the Minister please explain why it is important to support fossil fuels in this way, given the crisis the world is facing in terms of climate change?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000932\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also want to point out that, no matter what, the type of fossil fuels that are available in New Zealand would not replace the type of crude that we get from Iran and from the Middle East. It\u2019s not the right quality of crude. So why are we mining these fossil fuels in New Zealand, and why are we encouraging these in New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000933\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s a second point here, and it says \u201Call mining development expenditure\u201D. Now, in the Labour Party, we are not opponents of mining at all. We recognise the wealth it can bring to a country. But we are opposed to new coal mining. This is all development expenditure for new coal mining. I\u2019m really worried about this. Would this create an incentive, for example, for expanding the mine on the Denniston Plateau? There\u2019s some stuff here that just really goes against our conservation aims and it goes against the rules we have for what we\u2019re trying to do in terms of climate change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000934\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ERight at the start, when this bill was introduced on Budget night, it was clear that the accelerated write-down was available for fossil fuel mining. We opposed it then, but I also oppose it in this sense. Even though we thought the accelerated write-down was a good idea, extending it to fossil fuels was an absolutely bizarre thing to do.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000935\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d86d2180e42b28e0b3ad52994c62dbe5\u0022\u003EDavid MacLeod\u003C/span\u003E: So you don\u2019t support affordable energy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000936\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223b0bb66a94692cd3ea847e1c1c94be73\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: I wonder if the Minister could just give some reason\u2014take a call\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000937\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ebc917da10b5a72feab8d29741268fc0\u0022\u003EDavid MacLeod\u003C/span\u003E: I don\u2019t need to. Affordable energy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000938\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002266bbedc979f1a9b42fb401a7e7f952f8\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014behind the policy decision for allowing petroleum mining and allowing coal mining to be supported in this way. Take a call, David\u2014take a call.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022 data-id=\u0022e09884d46891c2852a9041a4d8da132a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000939\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e09884d46891c2852a9041a4d8da132a\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY (Minister for Mental Health) (09:19)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. First, in response to my Canterbury colleague Reuben Davidson, who is the rising star of the Labour Party\u2014and, I must say, full credit for innovativeness around filibustering. He is reading out a whole section and then asking the question of what it means in plain English. I look forward to more of those questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000940\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo the Hon Dr Deborah Russell, there were questions around what the gaps were that needed to be filled. The advice I\u2019ve received is that there is no significant change from the original legislation. It covers other types of asset classes other than depreciable property, where it was always intended to include improvements, but the definition wasn\u2019t included in relation to the relevant sections. The proposed change introduces the definition to those sections. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000941\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo the question around double deductions, there will be no double deductions. To the extent that a taxpayer claims Investment Boost, they will get only the balance of the deduction. The deduction is limited to the expenditure. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000942\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo the question from the Hon Dr Deborah Russell around why it is so complicated for new section DI 6(2) in clause 35(1AC), this section is complicated because it contains integrity provisions. Most taxpayers will have simpler circumstances, and so the approach will be simpler. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022 data-id=\u00226d75c4c72253962823e3305f98f84f78\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000943\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226d75c4c72253962823e3305f98f84f78\u0022\u003EREUBEN DAVIDSON (Labour\u2014Christchurch East) (09:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and thank you to the Minister in the chair, the Hon Matt Doocey, for the answers\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000944\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225322e0a4529b497cbc59faf0515037dd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220b8865675b7de1a94d69163483b8ae5b\u0022\u003EShanan Halbert\u003C/span\u003E: Reading out his responses.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000945\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214a08295c4f7e41d2d483bec613cb8a9\u0022\u003EREUBEN DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014to previous questions, and, yes, as my colleague points out, for reading out his responses to my questions that I\u2019d asked previously. The\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000946\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f0fa4de5deeb747316083638edef125a\u0022\u003EHon Matt Doocey\u003C/span\u003E: And what are you reading?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000947\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a7fef78b6a7725fc9e959f709b49066\u0022\u003EREUBEN DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m reading the bill, Minister. I\u2019m reading the bill\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000948\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221b48b2ea0be5e9ea623cd7ae5ffc060\u0022\u003EHon Matt Doocey\u003C/span\u003E: Word for word.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000949\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002222d4380aa3939d617234e7d92d01d6e1\u0022\u003EREUBEN DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014which is what my questions relate to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000950\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228d51abd33715342443427f2f485140ab\u0022\u003EHon Matt Doocey\u003C/span\u003E: Hasn\u2019t even come to the House and prepared questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000951\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a391168aaac84f107a799c4c1596e39\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Minister, I won\u2019t warn you again. When you are engaging cross-party, you have a microphone, which means you have an advantage over everyone else in the Chamber. If flippancy goes through the Chamber, it does give you an advantage, and so please take the advice\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000952\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce9adc5ee15554e5379b09e57de93322\u0022\u003EHon Matt Doocey\u003C/span\u003E: He could have asked proper questions, though.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000953\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eb0af4f381c8c4a305124904c6bd1c38\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I\u2019ll decide that; not you, as Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000954\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223e5963832fcce1e1a6b9188fe8956329\u0022\u003EREUBEN DAVIDSON\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m now wanting to ask some questions specifically around the clauses in this bill\u2014which is the document I have in front of me, for the Minister\u2019s reference\u2014around the employee share scheme rules. This is really important, especially for New Zealand\u2019s economic development or economic growth, depending on how you want to interpret the title of that portfolio\u2014but it\u2019s really important for both economic development and economic growth, because it\u2019s around the rules that we put in place in law to empower and enable the start-up sector in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000955\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, we\u2019re known around the world for being very, very good, if not the best in the world, at innovation and innovating, and our start-ups the length of the country\u2014many of which I\u2019ve had the privilege to visit and see what goes on\u2014are leading the way with new ideas and with developing talent locally and attracting talent internationally. A big part of attracting and holding that talent in our innovation sector comes down to allowing those employees and individuals to be invested not just in the realisation of the idea but also in the potential growth and monetisation that transfers from intellectual property to initial public offering that those companies are seeking to have. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000956\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we\u2019re looking at in this section of the bill are the rules and regulations put in place around the issuing or transferral for an employee to become a share scheme beneficiary. There\u2019s a specific reference in the bill at new section EA 4B, \u201CDeferred tax for unlisted employee share schemes\u201D, in clause 40, where new section EA 4B(2) says, \u201CThe employer may, at the time the shares are issued or transferred, designate the shares issued or transferred to an employee share scheme beneficiary as employee deferred shares.\u201D Then there\u2019s an underlined section here that gets very interesting. It goes on to say, \u201CIf the employer makes that designation, the employer must notify both the Commissioner and the employee share scheme beneficiary of that designation\u201D\u2014and this is the number\u2014\u201Cwithin 20 days after the date of issue or transfer, or by a later date allowed by the Commissioner.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000957\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question for the Minister here is: what\u2019s the process for the designation of that later date, is there discretion, and are there specific instances where the Commissioner of Inland Revenue would be asked case by case, or are we looking here at a blanket ruling that could extend out that 20-day period? I mean, 20 days can sound like a long time, but 20 days is four weeks. In our innovation and start-up sector, we know that a lot can happen in that period of time and, also, if you\u2019re dealing with time zones in different countries and investments from other territories in other countries and from foreign investors, as well, that could all be very difficult to progress in that 20-day period. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000958\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThose are my questions for the Minister: what\u2019s the process; where is the discretion, if there is any; would there be specific instances of variation of that 20-day limitation, or is there likely to be the facility for a blanket ruling that would shift that 20-day discretion for the commissioner? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022 data-id=\u0022a971b55078e593f734362f3671b826ca\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000959\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a971b55078e593f734362f3671b826ca\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY (Minister for Mental Health) (09:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. In response to the Hon Deborah Russell, who asked her question as to why include petroleum and mining expenditure, I\u2019ve been advised that the decision to include petroleum and mining expenditure\u2014these were included in Investment Boost so that all expenditure and capital investment is treated equally. It is a good policy that aims at driving productivity for all sectors.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022bf44a8eb98c7f5b68f09d2cfe9265694\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000960\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bf44a8eb98c7f5b68f09d2cfe9265694\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (09:26)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the Minister in the chair, the Hon Matt Doocey, for his answer to that question. I think that we debated it substantially at the time on Budget night, and if you\u2019re going to do that\u2014I don\u2019t agree with doing it, but if you\u2019re going to do that\u2014then a consistency reason applies.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000961\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe have now moved on to the employee share scheme rules. These are clauses 39 to 41, and my colleague Reuben Davidson has already talked about some of the issues there. I just want to draw the attention of\u2014it really got me. It\u2019s new section EA 4B in clause\u00A040, and I want to draw the drafters\u2019 attention to this, because I think there\u2019s been a typo or a mistake. There\u2019s section EA 4B, then there\u2019s section EA 4B(1), section EA 4B(2), section EA 4B(3)\u2014and that\u2019s quite straightforward\u2014and then there\u2019s section EA 4B(4B). I\u2019m looking at it on page 28, halfway down the page, and I think that it should be subsection\u00A0(4), not subsection (4B). \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000962\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHopefully, that will get picked up and tidied up somewhere, but then it goes to section EA 4B(2), and so we\u2019ve got two subsection (2)s in there now. I\u2019m pretty sure that there are just some typos going on somewhere, but if the drafters and the officials, who I know will be listening in the room outside, because there\u2019s a suite of officials working on this bill\u2014as I\u2019ve said, I\u2019m pretty sure it\u2019s just a typo, but it would be nice to get that one tidied up. I guess that it would have been tidied up at some stage, but it certainly would help in debating it, and this just goes to the fact that I did actually read the bill, unlike my colleagues on the other side of the Chamber, it seems. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000963\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAside from that issue with the typos, I was particularly interested\u2014and the reason why I picked this up was because I was looking at new section EA 4B(4B), and I thought that that just can\u2019t be right\u2014in where it\u2019s talking about the liquidity event date. In terms of the liquidity event, I guess what I\u2019m concerned about here is whether we meet the arm\u2019s-length criteria, particularly. Obviously, at the point at which we\u2019re trying to establish a liquidity event, we need to be sure that the value established is correct. The best way to do that is through having an arm\u2019s-length transaction. This applies particularly from, under new subsection (4B)(a)(i)\u2014which should be new subsection (4)(a)(i)\u2014the date on which it becomes a listed company. At that stage, for the shares which will be issued to an employee, there is a value established, and so that\u2019s quite a good date. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000964\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, new subsection (4B)(a)(ii) says, \u201Cthe date the employee share scheme beneficiary\u201D\u2014that\u2019s the employee\u2014\u201Csells or transfers the shares to a person who is not associated with a beneficiary\u201D. I wonder if the Minister could explain just the extent to which that term \u201Cnot associated\u201D is working: who counts as being associated with the beneficiary and who counts as not being associated with the beneficiary? In this case, we do want to be very, very sure that we are establishing a genuine arm\u2019s-length transaction to establish a genuine value, and so it would be great to clarify exactly how it meets that test. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000965\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other thing that I was fitting in there was the date on which shares are cancelled, including by the company ceasing to exist. So the employee will have been given a whole lot of shares, as is common in start-ups, but then, as is equally common in start-ups, start-ups don\u2019t always succeed, and people have to try several things before they succeed, and then the shares achieve zero value, and that counts as a liquidity event, too. What then happens to the employees\u2019 remuneration? How is that, sort of, figured into the\u2014I guess it\u2019s just a non-event, in a sense, but if the Minister could clarify that, that would be very helpful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000966\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere was just one other thing\u2014oh, no, I think we can move on. Those are some of the questions I wanted to ask\u2014oh, no, I want to ask one other thing. In this new section EA 4B, inserted by clause 40, I want to go to EA 4B; should be new subsection (4)\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000967\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d51db73e4d16ea0fef66a3b4c23a7b9\u0022\u003ERyan Hamilton\u003C/span\u003E: What page?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000968\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e58e2132aa8ee6621b809f8b810819e4\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Page 28, new subsection (4B), it talks about the shares. The date is obviously the sale date, and then it talks about \u201Cunless the shares are subject to a restriction that prevents their disposal\u201D. So it means the date on which the restriction ends. I\u2019m just trying to think about that\u2014if the Minister could clarify. I\u2019m taking that it\u2019s the instance where perhaps the shares are listed, but the employee is not permitted to dispose of them until, say, a year after the listing date or something like that. Now, that might be a fairly common thing to do to ensure that the employee\u2019s expertise stays with the start-up and so on, or that they\u2019re\u2014so I just wonder if the Minister could clarify exactly what sorts of restrictions might be envisaged there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000969\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAgain, when it\u2019s coming to \u201Cassociated persons\u201D or not associated persons\u2014so trying to establish that arm\u2019s-length thing: the nature of restrictions, does that create a relationship that fits within the associated person rules, and things like that? I would hope that the restriction has to have a very certain date to it, otherwise I could see trigger events or a very certain trigger event that then says, no, this restriction is at an end. Otherwise, I can see the possibility for manipulating the date at which there is a liquidity event and, therefore, manipulating the value of the liquidity event. I wonder if I could just get some clarity around that, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022 data-id=\u0022a985484ac6708448d7dd7d81d29a1b73\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000970\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a985484ac6708448d7dd7d81d29a1b73\u0022\u003EREUBEN DAVIDSON (Labour\u2014Christchurch East) (09:32)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just to further probe into one of these clauses, clause 41 here, which is \u201CSection EA 5 amended (Income from disposal of original shares under share-lending arrangements)\u201D. In subclause (2B) here, it says, \u201CIn section EA 5(1)(c), replace\u201D\u2014and then it quotes\u2014\u201C \u2018in the following income year (the later income year)\u2019 with \u2018in a later income year\u2019.\u201D What you\u2019ve potentially got there is a shift, in my reading of it, and I\u2019m seeking some clarity from the Minister in the chair, the Hon Matt Doocey. If you\u2019re saying, \u201Cin the following income year\u201D, that\u2019s very specific, that\u2019s next year; if you\u2019re saying in \u201Ca later income year\u201D, that\u2019s very broad, that\u2019s potentially any year following the one you are in, which implies, or could imply, a period of deferral\u2014well, an infinite period of deferral, because you\u2019re saying \u201Ca later income year\u201D and not \u201Cthe following income year\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000971\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI\u2019m really seeking some clarification from the Minister about his understanding of what that means and how broadly that could be applied, and what risks that might pose\u2014because, all of a sudden, something that had to be tidied up in the following income year now may never be tidied up or could be tidied up in two years, 10 years, 50 years. So I\u2019d like some clarification from the Minister about exactly what the change there in clause\u00A041(2B) will mean. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022 data-id=\u0022dd61876457b220e60e971aec9d013bd8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000972\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dd61876457b220e60e971aec9d013bd8\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY (Minister for Mental Health) (09:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. In response to the question around clauses 39 to 41, employee share schemes\u2014is there discretion for the 20-day period? I\u2019ve been advised that, yes, there is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000973\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ETo respond to the Hon Dr Deborah Russell\u2014we will now call her the \u201CEagle-eyed Deborah Russell\u201D: are there typos, as pointed out? I thought it was a very good question and did leave the reader with that thought, but I have been advised that, no, this is not a typo. The numbering will be updated in the assent version of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022179a05ebcefdc19375ffcfa1adb55413\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000974\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022179a05ebcefdc19375ffcfa1adb55413\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (09:35)\u003C/span\u003E: I think there are still a few more questions that the Minister in the chair, the Hon Matt Doocey, hasn\u2019t answered yet, but I think we\u2019ve dealt with the questions around the employee share schemes. That still leaves a couple of major topics in this section: one is the foreign investment fund (FIF) and revenue account method (RAM) rules, and the other is the matter introduced in the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 560, which has not been discussed in detail by the Finance and Expenditure Committee\u2014although we discussed some of the policy proposals there\u2014and we did not have submissions on it, so I do want to cover some of those issues quite carefully.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000975\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAside from the questions that the Minister hasn\u2019t been able to answer yet\u2014and I\u2019m sure he will do so in due course\u2014I want to move to clauses 51 to 67B, and that\u2019s the revenue account method rules for the alternative to the foreign investment fund rules. First of all, just before I do that, I just want to note a couple of other things to do with the accepted financial arrangements in section EW 5, where clause 44 replaces \u201C50,000\u201D with \u201C100,000\u201D, and in section EW 57 and a few others. I think it\u2019s EW 57 replacing \u201C1,000,000\u201D with \u201C2,000,000\u201D. I think these are good changes. Those thresholds were put in place a long time ago, and I think there was a real need to update those thresholds for the financial arrangements rules. So there\u2019s no particular need to discuss those. We agree with those changes, and I\u2019m sure that, had we been in Government, we would have been doing much the same. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000976\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMoving on to the foreign investment fund rules. Now, this is a very, very technical area of the Income Tax Act. Very roughly, how the rules work is that if a person has, I think it\u2019s $50,000 of foreign shares, they have to value those shares at the start of every year and then treat 5 percent of the value as taxable income and pay tax on that\u2014so not pay 5 percent as tax, but, say, 5 percent of that is income; 5 percent of that value is income; and then the income is included as deemed income in the person\u2019s tax return. That is, of course, a tax on unrealised gains, or you can also get unrealised losses out of it. There are some particular difficulties associated with that, especially for shares that are not in a listed company, or shares that\u2014because, in the end, there\u2019s no mechanism for establishing a value. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000977\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnd, of course, there are also particular issues for American citizens who are tax residents in New Zealand. The United States taxes its citizens, not its residents, and there were some particular interactions with the capital gains tax rules in the United States and the FIF rules here in New Zealand, which have been creating genuine difficulty for people. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000978\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve now introduced the revenue account method. That\u2019s so any dividends received are taxable as a person\u2019s marginal rate and a gain or loss in any value of shares is going to be included in income and tax, but the value would be discounted by 30 percent. I think that\u2019s the way it works. So, look, the policy intent is to reduce compliance costs for taxpayers and, really, to remove not just compliance costs but also to give people a way around having to pay taxes on unrealised value when they may not actually have the cash in hand to do so. It really has been a point of friction in the tax system.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000979\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENevertheless, I want to understand when a person may use the revenue account method. The person has to be a RAM taxpayer or a RAM interest\u2014I have to say, that acronym brings to mind sheep, but OK; I hope our farmers don\u2019t take this as an incentive to start using this method, either. I want the Minister to clarify exactly who may be a RAM taxpayer. There\u2019s a little bit of confusion there; it\u2019s hard to work your way through this. Perhaps a RAM taxpayer is a person who\u2019s a\u2014if the Minister could just set out in clear words what a RAM taxpayer is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022 data-id=\u00227da080358d381dca26f12f501ed0f227\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000980\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227da080358d381dca26f12f501ed0f227\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY (Minister for Mental Health) (09:40)\u003C/span\u003E: In response to the Hon Dr Deborah Russell\u2014the question around who is associated with a beneficiary and who is not\u2014I have been advised that the meaning of \u201Cassociated person\u201D is in Subpart YB of the Income Tax Act. There are no special rules for its proposal. To clarify, the ordinary rules apply.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000981\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWhat happens to employee remuneration on the date shares are cancelled? I have been advised that, when shares are cancelled, an employee will generally be compensated for the loss of the shares by the employer. This may be in the form of a cash payment or different shares of the same value. This is common in share restructure situations. This will trigger a tax liability.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022 data-id=\u002232599b73998bc8aa8339441b7f71d560\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000982\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b27d8609c612411686d517d0f9b09b28\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002232599b73998bc8aa8339441b7f71d560\u0022\u003EDAVID MacLEOD (National\u2014New Plymouth) (09:40)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000983\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022426bf5b0ea55744f3ed02992a4902ac9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m aware we\u2019re still moving, but let\u2019s keep moving.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022406b585d0d62fb485e2edfd793b38934\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022406b585d0d62fb485e2edfd793b38934\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (09:41)\u003C/span\u003E: Yep. I\u2019ve specified very clearly the two areas where I feel as though we need to do some more work yet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000985\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust carrying on looking at a revenue account method (RAM) taxpayer, I want to understand, then, what a \u201CRAM interest\u201D is? There are two definitions here, which I think we could do with plain English for. I know there are a number of fairly ordinary people who this affects who want to understand whether or not they can now be a RAM taxpayer or whether they have RAM interest. We\u2019re looking for a plain English version of what a RAM taxpayer is and what a RAM interest is.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000986\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think it\u2019s really important here what date this applies from. I recall, when I first became a member of Parliament\u2014it\u2019s getting on for close to nine years now; it\u2019s hard to believe this is my ninth year in this place\u2014I immediately had people approaching me over this particular issue: people who had lived in New Zealand for some years but still had shares overseas, particularly in the States. I want to understand if those people can now use this RAM method or whether they are still required to continue using the standard foreign investment fund rules. Now, as I said, this is a point of friction for those people. Is this going to solve that point of friction for people who have been here for a very long time indeed?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022 data-id=\u002202e539f0d7c00f7cdc7f72bb2d7dc69c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000987\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002233d6c990c64e41428c25aa2fcb7c3bf3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002202e539f0d7c00f7cdc7f72bb2d7dc69c\u0022\u003EFRANCISCO HERNANDEZ (Green) (09:42)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I appreciate that the member the Hon Dr Deborah Russell is going clause by clause, but I did have a question that I wanted to ask now that is slightly, I think, not quite where she was, because I do have to leave at 10 o\u2019clock.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000988\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question is around the Order in Council mechanism for the FamilyBoost package and whether there was consideration given to using that mechanism for the Amendment Papers and the fuel crisis relief package that the Government is offering. The change that this bill is making is that it allows the rates of the FamilyBoost to be set via Order in Council, which is, of course, a much simpler mechanism than setting them via legislation. Was there consideration given to making it so that the boost that the families are getting through the fuel crisis relief package is done via that mechanism, as well?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000989\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe know that this crisis is going to be quite a fast-moving one. We can\u2019t predict the future. We don\u2019t know what\u2019s going to happen. It just strikes me that the Order in Council mechanism is a much better way, potentially, to set the rates that are in the Minister\u2019s Amendment Papers rather than going through the changing of legislation, because the flexibility that it offers means that you can adjust the rates up or down depending on the price of fuel and depending on what\u2019s happening with the international markets. That\u2019s just my very quick question to the Minister, and I\u2019m looking forward to an answer to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u00228e7f25ab27550129852f22687306a1e8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000990\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228e7f25ab27550129852f22687306a1e8\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (09:44)\u003C/span\u003E: As well as a revenue account method (RAM) taxpayer and RAM interest, there is then an \u201Cextended\u201D RAM taxpayer. Now, that\u2019s kind of an interesting\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000991\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b6607af92d528608807e01a89123b745\u0022\u003ESuze Redmayne\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000992\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dbbc6a9c3ea51758adedfa34cc4cfaf0\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Yeah, talking about extended \u201Crams\u201D, I think Suze Redmayne has probably got a little bit of information to share here! What\u2019s an extended RAM, Suze? That\u2019s an odd kind of thing to have: not just a RAM taxpayer but an \u201Cextended\u201D RAM taxpayer. If the Minister could clarify: why might you have something that is extended further?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000993\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe other thing I want to be really clear about\u2014and I think people at home are going to need to be very sure about this too. It\u2019s sitting here in the legislation. It says that a RAM taxpayer has to be a \u201Cnatural\u201D person\u2014no companies, and so on. Now, again, if the Minister could just explain, and I appreciate it is a perfectly sensible rule, why a RAM taxpayer has to be a natural person\u2014so a company or a trust, or whatever, cannot be a RAM taxpayer?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022 data-id=\u00222f2f211d8ff89a123bb0689cc73275ba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000994\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222f2f211d8ff89a123bb0689cc73275ba\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY (Minister for Mental Health) (09:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Isn\u2019t it great to be talking about a RAM taxpayer and not a ram raid!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000995\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat is revenue account method (RAM) interest? It is not a liquid foreign share, which means not easily able to be sold or converted, such as not on the stock exchange.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000996\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhen may a person use RAM? I have been advised that the person must be a New Zealand tax resident on or after 1 April 2024, and the person must have been a non-resident for at least five years before becoming a New Zealand tax resident.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000997\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo the question from Reuben Davidson around clause 41, section EA 5\u2014the question was about why the change from \u201Cthe later\u201D income year to \u201Ca later\u201D income year\u2014the relevant disposal or return of shares can occur in more than one income year, and later for a returning share transfer. This is why the change was made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022e23aeb3bbfdea9b9df5d3517891e32be\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000998\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e23aeb3bbfdea9b9df5d3517891e32be\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (09:47)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m grateful for the explanations that the Minister, the Hon Matt Doocey, has made around the revenue account method. It is a highly technical piece of legislation, so, I think, rather than pursuing it further, I actually want to move on from this now. I appreciate that we have been spending a large amount of time on this part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090000999\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENevertheless, there is one more set of rules that I want to have a really good look at, and it\u2019s actually going to be quite important to have an extensive look at this, because they are rules around thin capitalisation. Now, these are contained in the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 559. This Amendment Paper was made available, I think, on Monday of this week. I\u2019m pretty sure I picked up a copy of it then. It might have been earlier; it might have been a little bit later. This is, I think, the first time we\u2019ve had an opportunity to have a look at the actual legislation. The particular ideas were discussed in select committee, but not the legislation, so there is quite a bit of work to do on this section.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001000\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust to set the context for the committee, a brief explanation of the thin capitalisation rules: what multinational companies could do, if you\u2019re not careful about it, is locate all of their debt in New Zealand and get a deduction for it even if they didn\u2019t actually have a lot of their investment in New Zealand. It\u2019s a pretty standard strategy for shifting funds around the world and getting the best tax deduction possible. What the thin capitalisation rules do is make sure that companies don\u2019t load a high proportion and commercially unrealistic level of debt into New Zealand and claim high deductions. I think, under the thin capitalisation rules, firms can have up to 60 percent debt financing here or, if they look at the average debt financing of the company across the world, they can have 110\u00A0percent of the multinational\u2019s average debt financing located here. What that does, then, is ensure that the deductions that are taken in New Zealand are fair and reasonable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe trouble is that that can, in some ways, be a barrier to some investment, and we do want to ensure that we encourage inward investment, as well. We know we need it around infrastructure. These thin capitalisation rules are now being modified to ensure that, where we\u2019re getting inward investment for infrastructure, those companies can get a reasonable deduction. Particularly, they have to have third-party debt and all sorts of things going on there, but, provided some infrastructure investment, they can get the full deduction. I hope the Minister in the chair is appreciating that explanation, as well, given that the Minister who is responsible for this legislation is not able to be here at this time. That, of course, happens. We understand this. The Minister in the chair is doing an excellent job\u2014an excellent job.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001002\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere are two new clauses here in the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper 559: new clauses\u00A069B and 69C. I have to say that 69B is a little dull\u2014sorry, drafters, legislation officials\u2014but 69C is where all the work is done. What 69C does is it introduces a new section FE 7C. Now, FE contains all the thin capitalisation rules, so this is the obvious place for these new rules to go in.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to go to new section\u2014oh, I\u2019ve managed to put an \u201CFEC\u201D there; clearly, I\u2019ve just got the Finance and Expenditure Committee on my mind\u2014FE 7C(1)(a). What this does is it says that people who can use this exemption to the thin capitalisation rules for infrastructure have to meet the requirements of section FE 2(1)(b), (c), or (cc). Now, FE 2(1)(b) is a non-resident company, (c) is a resident company that is more than 50 percent overseas owned, and (cc) is a resident company controlled by an overseas trustee. Roughly, that\u2019s how it works. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001004\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is the question for the Minister: new section FE 2(1)\u2014why would a non-resident who is not a company not be able to claim this deduction if they are engaging in infrastructure, if they\u2019re providing funding for infrastructure? Now, I get that that\u2019s a highly unusual situation, but why would they not be able to claim that deduction, a non-resident who is not a company; why not FE 2(1)(cb), a resident company that, effectively, has overseas control through counting of its holdings?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, people who\u2019ve worked in tax will know that there are these wiring diagrams showing capital flows and cash flows and revenue flows and deduction flows and all sorts of ownership flows. Those wiring diagrams are very, very complicated, and you count up those holdings. What I want to understand from the Minister, given those who can use these exemptions, is: why is it that FE 2(1)(a) and FE 2(1)(cb) are not included in new FE 7C(1)(a)?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022 data-id=\u00222ad616cc7862e4d3083269fbb60f7ace\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222ad616cc7862e4d3083269fbb60f7ace\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY (Minister for Mental Health) (09:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. In answer to Francisco Hernandez\u2019s question\u2014who said he had to leave at 10 o\u2019clock, so I thought I\u2019d expedite that question a bit quicker. He had to go and\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c47769e2b29362473eb400de98b8dfd7\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EBusy guy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228945d53ce4487a225c2af7387b5f5983\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014well, that\u2019s right\u2014do what Green MPs do, like play hacky-sack or something like that! Did we consider doing the in-work tax credit by Order in Council? No, in-work tax credit rate changes are generally made by primary legislation. The reference to Order in Council relates to setting a date when support will stop, not for setting the rate itself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EFor the question by the Hon Deborah Russell, who I never thought I\u2019d hear say that she found part of tax legislation dull\u2014I mean, those nine years are changing you slowly. I never thought I\u2019d hear that. It\u2019s surely all exciting. Who can use extended revenue account method (RAM): I\u2019ve been advised \u201Cextended RAM taxpayer\u201D are RAM taxpayers who are also being taxed in another country. This distinction was necessary because they needed RAM to apply to more investments to resolve the double taxation issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022 data-id=\u0022721c731dc1c3e4786d90b4146e1432a7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022694c3cef004e40d78a26712dce80070d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022721c731dc1c3e4786d90b4146e1432a7\u0022\u003ESUZE REDMAYNE (Junior Whip\u2014National) (09:54)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001011\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022753250b540348bfacbbc3c87072aeaad\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Keep moving, but with some pace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u002293044ca27bc9ec61027d016c422d6df1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002293044ca27bc9ec61027d016c422d6df1\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (09:54)\u003C/span\u003E: I am keeping moving. I want to move on to some further questions on this Amendment Paper 559 that was just dropped this week, when we haven\u2019t seen the legislation previously. I appreciate that, in the absence of the Minister responsible for this legislation, the Minister in the chair, the Hon Matt Doocey, is doing an excellent job. Nevertheless, it\u2019s very hard to discuss some of these technical issues and to get the policy intent behind them because of this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to look at new section FE 7C(3), and this is one where I just want a confirmation of this. It says, \u201CFor the purposes of applying this subpart to any other person\u201D. This is new subpart FE 7C or maybe FE\u2014if they could clarify whether that\u2019s subpart FE or new section FE 7C, that would be helpful, because I\u2019m just not quite sure what, in FE 7C(3), this subpart refers to. \u201CFor the purposes of applying \u2026 to any other person\u201D\u2014so another person who might be able to claim the exemption for eligible infrastructure. I\u2019m envisioning a situation where two entities are trying to claim the exemption for eligible infrastructure, so you can\u2019t count the debt interest assets and non-debt liabilities of the eligible infrastructure entity and so on. If the officials could clarify that that\u2019s to prevent a double-dip on this. I think that\u2019s what their work is doing. I might be getting it wrong, but, again, because I\u2019ve only just seen this legislation, we haven\u2019t had an opportunity to discuss in the Finance and Expenditure Committee. I\u2019m unsure as to exactly what that work is doing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECarrying on from there, on FE 7C(4), we have a \u201Cnon-QID\u201D\u2014or a non \u201Ckid\u201D, \u201Cquid\u201D, something or other\u2014interest. I\u2019m just disappointed that officials missed the opportunity for a full-scale quidditch reference. They could have done that. What FE 7C(4) does is it sets up an amount of income that gets counted as income. I was puzzled by that, because it\u2019s got the subtitle \u201CIncome\u201D there. Of course, that led me to the question: this is all supposed to be enabling a deduction, and I\u2019m not quite sure how the mechanics of this are working. Where is the deduction itself enabled? Or is it the case that, first of all, we have the thin capitalisation rules that prevent a deduction, and then this new section FE 7C prevents the prevention of the deduction and we\u2019re doing a double negative here? If the officials could just clarify how that mechanism actually works. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to make sure that there is a deduction enabled somewhere. But if it\u2019s done via cancelling, as it were, the prevention of the deduction, it would be helpful to know exactly how that mechanism is located within the Income Tax Act. So that\u2019s a couple of questions for the Minister there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022 data-id=\u002222ecee7c9bec8a7cdb24fd13a36f9919\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002222ecee7c9bec8a7cdb24fd13a36f9919\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY (Minister for Mental Health) (09:58)\u003C/span\u003E: High productivity this morning. The question was: why would a non-resident that is not a company not be able to claim a deduction? I\u2019ve been advised the provision is focused on companies because these are the most likely taxpayers using it. Other taxpayers can always incorporate a company to access this thin capitalisation treatment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe next question was asked by the Hon Deborah Russell. Why does foreign investment fund revenue account method (RAM) only apply to natural persons and certain trusts\u2014e.g., family trusts? The RAM proposal was intended to remove tax barriers to migration and settlement of people in New Zealand and returning New Zealanders, hence why that is worded in this way.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022381f40bfaa94720a013ca8c771d5c916\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022381f40bfaa94720a013ca8c771d5c916\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (09:59)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I\u2019m very grateful for that answer and, of course, that makes good economic sense to encourage people to migrate into this country. I commend the Minister and the officials for introducing that change.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECarrying on, on new section FE 7C, I want to go to FE 7C(7)(a). We\u2019ve got \u201Celigible infrastructure entity\u201D and we\u2019re trying to define what that is. It means a person who is carrying on a business or project of \u201Ccreating, operating, maintaining or upgrading qualifying infrastructure assets the person owns;\u201D. Now, I\u2019ve got some serious concerns around those qualifying infrastructure assets and I do want to discuss those in a moment, and \u201Ccreating, operating, maintaining, or upgrading\u201D seems reasonable for the actual asset that is being created\u2014this legislation is supposed to be enabling or encouraging infrastructure development\u2014but then, for eligible infrastructure, it says \u201Cany activity in New Zealand that is ancillary to or facilitates the activities described in subparagraph (i) if the person carries on any such activity;\u201D. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat\u2019s going to be \u201Cancillary\u201D to \u201Ccreating, operating, maintaining, or upgrading qualifying infrastructure\u201D? I just recall that when we were discussing the accelerated write-down rules a short time ago, one of the things that we discussed there was how improvement had been expanded to maintain, develop, or something like that\u2014the actual definition of \u201Cimprovement\u201D had been expanded into some particular words. I\u2019m really worried that \u201Cany activity in New Zealand that is ancillary to or facilitates the activities\u201D is going to be something that subsequently gets expanded, as well, or needs further explanation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf we could have some examples, maybe, from officials of what sorts of activities would fall into that \u201Cancillary to or facilitating the activities\u201D. I think 7(a)(i) is pretty clear, but 7(a)(ii) is somewhat unclear because of that word \u201Cancillary\u201D and also those words \u201Cfacilitating the activities\u201D. If the Minister of Revenue is able to answer that, that would be helpful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022 data-id=\u00223477126761b9585af516616c4fa9f4fb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223477126761b9585af516616c4fa9f4fb\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY (Minister for Mental Health) (10:01)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Good morning. The question is, who is the \u201Cany other person\u201D referred to in new section FE 7C, added by clause 69C in Amendment Paper 559? I\u2019ve been advised that thin capitalisation rules apply on New Zealand group level. When an exemption applies to an entity that is part of a group, the normal thin capitalisation calculation applies to the rest of the group, disregarding the entity applying the exemption.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022935d60ad45edc42e7f4ac33f544368a9\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m going to take a call from the Hon Dr Deborah Russell, but I do know, in consultation with the previous Chair, that we\u2019re getting pretty close in this Part 2. I know that you\u2019ve been honed into this the whole time, so a couple more specific questions would be really good.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022e7d0b08a62b1ddd14ab71b0cc95886dd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e7d0b08a62b1ddd14ab71b0cc95886dd\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (10:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I note that this particular set of legislation only dropped this week. It hasn\u2019t been examined in the Finance and Expenditure Committee\u2014it\u2019s the last major topic I wish to examine in Part 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f0f2d2fbd1b7d8fcf08d91bbb3531f5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m just asking to\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022185df0b8d0c499670e1569c4cd6a62c1\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Yep, and I\u2019ve been moving.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c08c1c892c21a0dca2ff5a5d98470fd\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m looking specifically to you as the member who\u2019s been honing in on this. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f2ea813abfd685536d3e97ec7d714de\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m going to keep on moving clause by clause through, very steadily.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002244d7b490e5343eeec2a8d3bc549b2b20\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Very quickly, questions and not comments. OK?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba450802deedf2a1b7993a69046e3fdd\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: New section FE 7C(7)(b)(ii) added by clause 69C in Amendment Paper 559\u2014and this is really interesting. It\u2019s talking about assets and which assets are recognised in the balance sheet, and it\u2019s subparagraphs (7)(b)(ii) and (iv) that are giving me concern. In terms of valuing the assets, we have \u201Ctangible assets:\u201D, \u201Cfinancial assets:\u201D, and \u201Cdeferred tax assets:\u201D, but there are two there\u2014\u201Cintangible assets:\u201D and \u201Cgoodwill:\u201D. Now, how are they valued? This is really worrying me because, of course, goodwill and intangible assets are subject to quite a bit of opinion\u2014as it were\u2014in terms of their value. There\u2019s an opportunity there to inflate the value of assets sitting on a balance sheet as to whether or not they can be\u2014as to meet that threshold. I\u2019m concerned about how the value of those assets is going to be audited and policed by Inland Revenue. If I could have an answer around the ancillary activities and these intangible assets, they have two areas where I think there\u2019s wriggle room in the legislation and I would be concerned about that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, \u201C(c)\u201D is kind of interesting\u2014new section FE 7C(7)(c)\u2014the things that an entity doesn\u2019t have, so a qualified infrastructure group must not have these things. I\u2019m just going to say that the reality is that it\u2019s a logical impossibility to prove a negative. That\u2019s just a basic finding from logic\u2014one cannot prove a negative. How is a company going to be able to prove something that they don\u2019t have? I mean, I can assert that I don\u2019t have a cat, but proving I don\u2019t have a cat is a different thing. I would like some clarity as to how that is going to be policed, as well. That\u2019s three items there that I need some clarity from officials on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen new section FE 7C(8)\u2014and this is the qualifying infrastructure. It has to be \u201Ca tangible asset in New Zealand that provides \u2026 transport infrastructure\u201D\u2014tick, I\u2019m happy with that. \u201CProvides energy infrastructure \u2026 electricity generation, transmission, and distribution assets\u201D\u2014provided it\u2019s green electricity, that\u2019d be a tick from us. \u201CWater infrastructure\u201D\u2014this got me a bit worried, overseas companies owning water infrastructure and investing in water infrastructure. There\u2019s a few issues around that in New Zealand at the moment and that kind of begs the question as to who ought to own our water infrastructure. I\u2019d like to know what the policy discussions were behind enabling water infrastructure to be owned, built, maintained, operated by overseas investors. Overseas investors expect a return, and I feel as though water infrastructure\u2014this is a conversation we need to have in this country\u2014is infrastructure that needs to be operated by and for the benefit of New Zealanders, not by and for the benefit of overseas investors. \u201CTelecommunications infrastructure\u201D\u2014OK, no worries about that one. \u201CWaste infrastructure\u201D\u2014it\u2019s got me a wee bit worried, but not as worried as the water infrastructure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen the last one: \u201Csocial infrastructure \u2026 hospitals, schools, libraries, prisons, large-scale student accommodation or similar public facilities\u201D\u2014the large-scale student accommodation: all right, that seems OK. But hospitals? Schools? Libraries? Prisons?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228a27dcb7d7e15f3a6d41a0c3458a05a0\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003EYou just said that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278dd0147f0a0313ef0e1eacac09e8d76\u0022\u003EHon Member: \u003C/span\u003ERepetition.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223b8addaa0e0afe23879a564e68255bb3\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: This is actually a serious policy issue. This opens the door to private investment in our prisons. This opens the door to private investment in our schools. This opens the door to private investment in hospitals. This opens the door to private investment in libraries. This is a very serious policy question and I think we need to spend some time in this committee examining it, especially as this Amendment Paper was only dropped this week. There is a very serious policy issue here and that is the extent to which there should be private investment in these entities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWhen we imprison someone, we take away\u2014Madam Chair?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224a133d16f418086d71e301127168b1ff\u0022\u003EHon Members: \u003C/span\u003EMadam Chair!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002270f012cd919a88a180f500a79fbe99b5\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The Hon Dr Deborah Russell.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f8e10a16acbbe89abe3d50205f27d2d9\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: This is a serious question. When we imprison someone, we take away their freedom. That is a large and important thing for a State to do, but this says that people can derive a profit from the State imprisoning someone. That is deeply worrying. Our public schools have always been that: public schools and they have been provided by the State. As much as possible they have provided a free education. But if we are going to have private investment in our public schools, then that private investment is going to demand a return. That private investment for operating and maintaining those school buildings takes money out of taxpayers\u2019 money and sends it off to private investors overseas. Is this the right thing for us to be doing as a country?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI want members on the other side to justify this. Why should we be enabling foreign investment in our prisons? This is a deeply serious matter and I want a policy answer from the Minister in the chair, the Hon Matt Doocey. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022 data-id=\u0022141337d641e857ab4a819fd9e8583bf6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022141337d641e857ab4a819fd9e8583bf6\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY (Minister for Mental Health) (10:09)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, I was just going to compliment the Hon Deborah Russell for being so strong, but starting to falter a bit\u2014although Reuben Davidson did start off strong but faded a wee bit.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225d0c31ebf8ff713baf002aefdd1fd616\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Just answer the questions please, Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e5b5967a4bcc4a97a5871de3b5d55e9e\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY\u003C/span\u003E: But I see the Hon Duncan Webb\u2019s come in and passed him a few questions, so no doubt he\u2019ll be back up on his feet now he\u2019s been prepped a bit better.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question around thin cap proposal\u2014how will the value given to intangible assets be audited, policed by IRD? I\u2019ve been advised the definition of \u201Cintangible assets\u201D and \u201Cgoodwill\u201D follows standard accounting treatment, so IRD would check that this standard accounting treatment is being followed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question from the Hon Deborah Russell: what is new section FE 7C(4), inserted by clause 69C on Amendment Paper 559\u2014if I\u2019m correct in that\u2014and that classification doing? Subsection (4), effectively, denies a deduction by deeming that income for debt that is not third party\u2014from related parties\u2014does not qualify, and the interest expense on this related party debt is deemed to be income. I\u2019ll just read that again: subsection (4), effectively, denies a deduction by deeming income for debt that is not third-party debt. Debt from related parties does not qualify and the interest expense on this related party debt is deemed to be income.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022 data-id=\u00221468d15f059ca5fe3772a3482e7cc079\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221468d15f059ca5fe3772a3482e7cc079\u0022\u003ERYAN HAMILTON (National\u2014Hamilton East) (10:10)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad88d8a8aa98764bbc7f3ba59c31fa37\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Part 2 set out on Amendment Papers 559 and 560 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022aa47d0b33a907b28ffda001cbdc5137a\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00223eb1e006800ecc6b5b388ff7743974f5\u0022\u003EPart 3 Amendments to Goods and Services Tax Act 1985, and Part A of Schedule\u00A02\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022446e9b1eca6ffb762adcb1f77504d890\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to Part 3, which is the debate on clauses 107 to 134, \u201CAmendments to Goods and Services Tax Act 1985\u201D, and Part A of Schedule 2. The question is that Part 3 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u002294127380c42be11ea52398db095b5d5a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002294127380c42be11ea52398db095b5d5a\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (10:12)\u003C/span\u003E: There are a number of minor changes in this part of the bill to the GST rules, but, actually, the thing that I really want us to focus on is the new joint venture rules. I don\u2019t want to go through all the remedials\u2014fascinating that each of them is on an individual basis, but I actually do want to focus on the joint venture rules.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor the benefit of the committee, in terms of joint ventures, what was going on was where companies were involved in a joint venture together, so one company would be paying\u2014sorry, two taxpayers, GST-registered taxpayers were engaging in a joint venture together, one entity would pay the bills and claim the GST and flow it through to the other company, who could claim their share of it, and so on. This whole process had seemed to go on in a fairly, I wouldn\u2019t say casual, but on a somewhat ad hoc basis. It was the accepted practice for how GST on joint ventures was accounted for. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere was a need to actually firm up the legislation on this. The practice followed commercial reality, but Inland Revenue established that, actually, through a draft ruling, this probably wasn\u2019t the appropriate practice; it didn\u2019t actually follow the legislation. Although people were doing something, which, at the end of the day, accounted for all the GST correctly, all the correct amount of GST was being paid\u2014that\u2019s our understanding\u2014it wasn\u2019t actually being done legally. So there was a need to make sure that the GST rules caught up with the actual practice, given that the actual practice was reflecting commercial reality and did actually mean that all the correct GST was being paid.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy understanding is this whole set of rules ensures that unincorporated bodies can indeed claim the GST. It proposes what is now called a flow-through treatment. We\u2019re familiar with flow-through treatment in other areas of the taxing Acts, for example, with flow-through companies and so on. This is a flow-through treatment here with GST.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe difficulty is that we got a whole lot of feedback from submitters and from accounting bodies, from some of our senior tax consultants that, actually, the rules now create more of a mess than there was in the first place. I just wonder if the Minister has a sense of how he would respond to that and what he would say to that, or what officials would say to that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI appreciate that this is a difficult bit of law, so I\u2019ll just go through it clause by clause. I was inviting the Minister in the chair, the Hon Matt Doocey, to perhaps comment on the general policy overall, but that\u2019s fine. I want to know why\u2014going to clause 108 which should be in section 2 amended, the interpretation section of the Goods and Services Tax Act\u2014\u201Cpartnerships\u201D are not included? You know, partnerships are the ultimate flow-through entity of anything. So it\u2019ll be interesting to know why partnerships are not included in these definitions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen it goes on in clause 108(6) to talk about some interesting things like\u2014it\u2019s a really interesting thing here\u2014a \u201Cnon-integral deduction\u201D, means for goods and services that don\u2019t make a substantial improvement to the main goods or does not become an integral part of the main goods. The \u201Cmain goods\u201D is an interesting definition in itself, but then a \u201Cnon-integral deduction\u201D, again, is there a definition of \u201Cintegral deduction\u201D sitting in the Act? In that case, wouldn\u2019t that be a better thing to do? I want to know why it was defined this way on a negative basis as a \u201Cnon-integral deduction\u201D instead of being defined in a positive manner as an \u201Cintegral deduction\u201D. If the Minister could give me some clarity on that, please. Apparently not\u2014not yet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECarrying on through these rules, and they are quite technical. If the Minister could explain\u2014sorry, I\u2019ve just lost my place here because the Goods and Services Tax Act is a little bit complicated; it\u2019s one of those ones that could do with a good tidy up. We\u2019ve got a definition here under clause 109, section 2A amended, the definition of \u201Cassociated persons\u201D and we\u2019ve got (db) \u201Can ordinary joint venture and a member of the ordinary joint venture\u201D is coming in, and we\u2019re inserting (dc) \u201C2 members of an ordinary joint venture or of a flow-through joint venture when they transact in their capacity as members of the joint venture:\u201D. They now become associated persons. I just wonder how that affects the associated persons in these flow-through rules for the new joint venture rules. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENormally, when we\u2019re looking at associated persons, we\u2019re trying to prevent some mischief. But this seems to be enabling people to conduct something together. That just feels like a faintly different use of the associated person rules around GST.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022 data-id=\u002223ecdf9fd05949f680774bfec8dca9c5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002223ecdf9fd05949f680774bfec8dca9c5\u0022\u003EREUBEN DAVIDSON (Labour\u2014Christchurch East) (10:18)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to look at one of the clauses in here in\u2014I\u2019m here on page 71 and it\u2019s really a threshold question around a determinant. In clause 111(4), \u201CAfter subsection\u00A05(23B), insert: (23C)\u201D, it steps through a number of scenarios here or criteria here for \u201Ca taxable supply of goods and services in a return provided by the supplier;\u201D Then when it gets down here to (23E) it goes on to say that \u201CSubsection (23F) applies if\u2014\u201D and, in (a), it says, \u201Csection 11(1)(md) is treated as applying to a taxable supply of goods and services in a return provided by the supplier: and (b) after the date on which the supply is made, the supplier or the Commissioner finds that section 11(1)(md) does not apply:\u201D Then it says, \u201C(c) the recipient of the goods and services did not provide the supplier with correct or sufficient information under section 78FB to enable the supplier to determine whether the supply should be zero-rated.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThere must be criteria or a threshold here, around what that level of sufficient information is or means. Then, if the onus is on the supplier to determine whether the supplier should be zero-rated or not, there\u2019s someone here who has to interpret the criteria or information. To me, there\u2019s two questions there: what metrics or framework would the recipient need to provide, but also what would the supplier need to provide? I\u2019m keen to get an understanding from the Minister around the level of detail that is provided to both parties in that relationship, to enable the correct determinant around the applicability or otherwise of the GST considerations within this part\u2014this amendment\u2014to this bill. If there is a grey area or if that\u2019s not crystal clear for people, the risk is that mistakes and errors will be made. Obviously, that\u2019s exactly what this bill is trying to prevent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022 data-id=\u002231686b9deff799d73aa46ac547969469\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002231686b9deff799d73aa46ac547969469\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY (Minister for Mental Health) (10:21)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I\u2019ll just gather a few questions up around partnerships. We had one specifically on clause 108: why are partnerships not included? I\u2019ve been advised this is to clarify for the avoidance of doubt that the rules can only apply to joint ventures, because, in some countries, joint ventures can include partnerships.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThere was a further question around definition and also complexity, especially within the amendments. I\u2019ve been advised the rules were subject to full public consultation; much of the volume and complexity of the amendments is in relation to zero-rating amendments, which were supported by submitters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022d2419b238350580f42c8817d30b3c9ad\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d2419b238350580f42c8817d30b3c9ad\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (10:22)\u003C/span\u003E: I want to refer to clause 114, which amends the zero rating of goods. The way the GST is set up is interesting: if exempt supplies, exempt goods, are completely outside the GST net, therefore you can\u2019t claim input costs, but zero-rated supplies are in the GST net, and you can claim input costs against them. When you zero-rate something it\u2019s to do with, in some cases, just ensuring that we\u2019re not adding unnecessary complexity to transactions, and so on. Section\u00A011 has a whole lot of goods that are zero-rated\u2014a whole lot of things that are zero-rated. It\u2019s adding into this section the zero-rating of the supply of goods and services through this joint venture.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThat does make sense, but I want to just clarify with the Minister that we shouldn\u2019t be passing goods back and forth in a joint venture and charging GST on them and so on. The zero rating here just enables that to happen efficiently, but nevertheless enables people to claim the input tax deductions\u2014so if I could have a clarification from the Minister on that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to just clarify, in clause 119: often, people make mistakes with recording the information for GST and it actually matters kind of a bit more than it does in some ways for the income tax because of the way that GST is a flow-through tax and flows and flows and cascades through the system. We need to have correct record-keeping all the way through. In the supply correction information\u2014that\u2019s section 19N of the Goods and Services Tax Act\u2014that date there is seven years from the date the supply was made. I just want to clarify that that is consistent with the other time frames in the GST Act; so that seven years works both ways. Again, it\u2019s just that consistency thing. We know that if people have the same date in their mind, then it\u2019s easier for them to comply with the tax law\u2014so just clarification that the time frame is actually consistent within the GST Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to go to new clause 120; it\u2019s the calculation of tax payable. You know, we have a flow-through joint venture; it\u2019s making both exempt tax supplies, so no GST involved whatsoever, and zero-rated GST supplies, so GST is involved and people can claim input tax deductions. But what we have here is two entities involved in a joint venture together claiming input tax deductions. They have to agree on the same method for all members; they have to have that agreed in writing between all members, and it has to be fair and reasonable as to the method they\u2019re going to use for apportionment. Minister, I just want to know: what happens if they don\u2019t agree? What is the consequence if they don\u2019t agree to that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022 data-id=\u0022ab488635d965b0aa228cbf9f882d5743\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002224cf2b07c863455d8ff343c5bc53b590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ab488635d965b0aa228cbf9f882d5743\u0022\u003EHon MATT DOOCEY (Minister for Mental Health) (10:25)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Just in response to the Hon Dr Deborah Russell\u2019s question around non-integral deductions, and is there a definition of integral deductions: the advice I\u2019ve received is because the relevant rules allow a GST-registered person to claim non-integral deductions for the relevant goods\u2014typically, expenses for repairs or maintenance associated with a house that they partly use for home office or for their business\u2014it is simpler, from a drafting perspective, to define what is not integral than to define what is integral.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022 data-id=\u00227e72006caf690e85f7c316f3261737e3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227e72006caf690e85f7c316f3261737e3\u0022\u003ERYAN HAMILTON (National\u2014Hamilton East) (10:26)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221485bf665ac887936e8d90705f89ccf\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Part 3 set out on Amendment Paper 559 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 3 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d8891910886f2e766a75cbd3c0e47a89\u0022\u003ECommittee of the Whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00221e9d5077b5125835de136a0e0a8eec3c\u0022\u003EPart 4 Amendments to Tax Administration Act 1994, and Part B of Schedule 1 and Part B of Schedule 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aed6c20048d26567c2dd22faf3893d62\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we now come to Part 4, which is the debate on clauses 135 to 171\u2014\u201CAmendments to Tax Administration Act 1994\u201D\u2014Part B of Schedule 1, and Part B of Schedule 2. The question is that Part 4 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022984558c30ab0d2de3f4a3da59d209dab\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022984558c30ab0d2de3f4a3da59d209dab\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (10:27)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re gradually making our way through this bill. There are, I think, three major topics I wish to discuss; they\u2019re kind of related. The three topics that are really worth discussing in here: first is the repeal of section 17GB of the Tax Administration Act. The second one, which is a very serious one, is the insertion of new section 18HB, \u201CRegular disclosure to Government agencies\u201D. I think we need to have a substantial discussion around those disclosure rules, and I can see that my colleague Vanushi Walters is itching to get to discuss that. The third\u2014and I must just check exactly where it is\u2014is the rules about what information a commissioner may collect from trusts has been repealed and changed. I do want to have a look at that, as well. Also sitting in here is the Schedule 7 amended\u2014I think sits in this part of the bill as well; that\u2019s clause 169.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI want to go back, straight away, to clause 141 of this bill. Clause 141 is very straight but it repeals section 17GB, and there are a number of other sections that are amended because of that: 17C, 17E. Section 17GB is a really interesting provision and, I think, a really necessary provision. It is the provision that enables the Commissioner of Inland Revenue to collect information from taxpayers and to require taxpayers to provide information to the commissioner for the purposes of forming tax policy. Forming tax policies is a really important role; tax policy is complicated. We have a very specialist team at Inland Revenue who work in tax policy, and people who make lifetime careers there, as I can see from some of the officials on the bench at the moment who make lifetime careers in tax policy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230905274d421d4c683a5fcb10a908ad1\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I don\u2019t think we should bring the officials into the debate.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0b0cd92e61ee7584ec1c4a8b291d8c8\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, I was wishing to compliment them, but I will withdraw that comment, then, and I\u2019ll make it in private later on. It is difficult to get tax policy right. Now, Inland Revenue, at the moment, has an excellent consultation process, which they work through to get tax policy right, but, even so, sometimes the information is simply not there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESection 17GB gave the commissioner power to collect information from individual taxpayers or groups of taxpayers in order to see what was going on in the tax system, in order to see what patterns of behaviour there were, in order to see whether there was any mischief going on, and in order to see what could be done better. The information could not be used for tax collection purposes; it was completely barred from being used for tax collection purposes. It could not be handed over to investigative teams, or anything horrid like that. It had to stay sitting in that tax policy purpose. There was no harm being done by this particular piece of legislation, but this Government has decided to repeal that piece of legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn the select committee process, really important groups of people\u2014such as, I think, Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand; I\u2019m trying to remember the others, but certainly the tax justice group\u2014urged that this clause be retained. Given that people wanted the clause retained, given that they saw value in it, given that they felt it made tax policy a lot better, why, then, is the Minister continuing with this repeal of 17GB, with repealing this really important plank in the way that we form policy? It\u2019s, I think, a real shame that it is being repealed, and I\u2019d like the Minister to justify it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022 data-id=\u00220ae6f35b4fec417f332e6ba74280406e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220ae6f35b4fec417f332e6ba74280406e\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour) (10:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I look forward to having a really robust discussion about clause 143, inserting new section 18HB, which is the insertion of the new disclosure requirements, and, in my view, a significant step into privacy rights. I think it really does require a broad discussion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere was an interesting point of view, which I agree with, put forward by the Privacy Foundation, where they make quite a compelling argument that there is no need for a new scheme of disclosure. There is already the ability for information-sharing agreements to be created under Part 7 of the Privacy Act. The objection to using the current framework is primarily that it takes too long, so that it takes up to 18 months to get one of these agreements in place, and that it\u2019s inefficient in terms of the purpose required for information sharing, particularly in regards to cases of fraud, etc. But the argument that the Privacy Foundation makes is that, actually, the existing regime\u2014so the Part 7 regime\u2014is sufficient. The delays that occur are not inherent or a necessary part of the system; it\u2019s, essentially, due to operational reasons, but they also argue that the existing framework is sufficient and there\u2019s no need for any of these changes. So they\u2019re arguing \u201CJust remove new section 18HB in its entirety\u2014there\u2019s no need because you could make operational efficiencies to make the current system work, and then you would also have the existing benefits of the system that we have.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to talk through the benefits that the current system has, because this is a clear choice that the Government has made not to try and address operational inefficiencies and use the benefits of the current system and bypass those protections which are important protections in privacy law. The first protection, they suggest, is that the current system is a legislative instrument, and while it does take some extra time, it does help guarantee high-quality drafting, high-quality information, so the information that\u2019s required is confirmed by Order in Council. This would permit an agreement that sits outside of that framework where there\u2019s an agreement between two agencies. The value of having that agreed by Order in Council is, of course, that the House then has the ability to disallow the agreement if it believes that it\u2019s in breach of the privacy principles. Again, that means that the approved information-sharing agreements\u2014the AISAs\u2014must be approved by Cabinet, as well. The time taken to do that is important because it does mean that there\u2019s sufficient protection for individuals.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second thing is that they say that consultation\u2014and they\u2019re right\u2014needs to occur under the existing information-sharing agreements. Under Part 7, you have to consult with agencies or people who may be affected, before you put that in place. Again, it does take a particular amount of time, but the argument is that that\u2019s certainly worth it, because then you ensure that you\u2019re protecting information and that the interests of those who may question the validity of a stretch into that information space can be taken account of.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1e3783f249b1eae13c85662f8b7524b\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The member does a very good job of interpreting the legislation, but I\u2019m waiting for a question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002226e4b4d38599126f31b93790cbc81a8e\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS\u003C/span\u003E: The ultimate question here is: why is there a need for new section 18HB, inserted by clause 143, at all? Essentially, we still have these information-sharing agreement provisions under Part 7 of the privacy regime\u2014so that\u2019s there. The argument from the Privacy Foundation is that that\u2019s sufficient. What I\u2019m setting out is why that is a better system. If the Government just chose to improve that system, as opposed to imposing this new one, they would not only be able to get the information required but individuals would still retain privacy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe other important point they make is that when information is matched or shared, the individual concerned would be alerted under the existing framework; that\u2019s not the case under the new framework. Their point there is that there can be errors that are made.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo the first question to the Minister is: why not retain the current regime and just address the operational issues that the Privacy Foundation have pointed to?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u0022ac70009e6e905e60d0def0ff1bd9cf74\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ac70009e6e905e60d0def0ff1bd9cf74\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (10:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019ll just answer the question from the Hon Dr Deborah Russell. This was a question around \u201CWhy repeal section 17GB?\u201D. We acknowledge submissions on this, and we acknowledge people\u2019s feedback, but, ultimately, the Government had concerns that section 17GB gave insufficient weight to the privacy of taxpayers\u2014and it actually links into the point from Vanushi Walters. Because of that, we thought a repeal was considered to be the best option for protecting the privacy interests of taxpayers. Just for some context, that section 17GB had only been used once before previously.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022fe32f413239be43765efb95091e7e682\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fe32f413239be43765efb95091e7e682\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (10:37)\u003C/span\u003E: As I said, I think it\u2019s a real shame that section 17GB hasn\u2019t been retained. A number of submitters came to us and said, \u201CWell, OK, we get that there were concerns around the use of 17GB, but then why not simply put more safeguards around it? Why not put more guardrails around it?\u201D So why not put explicit provisions into the law as to how it could be used? I do kind of agree that more guardrails could have been introduced in the first place, but why remove such a valuable tool from our policy officials? It would have been straightforward to put more guardrails around it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWe\u2019ve had pretty interesting discussions in the Finance and Expenditure Committee. This is available from the public hearing we had with the Commissioner of Inland Revenue earlier this year on the annual review. He talked about the way that taxpayers\u2019 data is protected. He pointed out that there are really stringent provisions around that. They\u2019ve dismissed people for breaching those provisions. I think, in the last five years, something like 75 people have been dismissed because they breached the provisions of information access, so they take really good care with their staff\u2014take them through all sorts of training programme things around the privacy of taxpayers\u2019 information. I\u2019m concerned that one way to use section 17GB simply would have been to shore up the protections around it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn discussing this, again, in public session, the assertion was made around section\u00A017GB that the commissioner actually had the power to collect this sort of information under section 17GB already; that he could already do so because he could use his powers around the stewardship of the tax system to collect the same information. Now, that seems like a long reach to me, and I would like to understand whether the commissioner can actually collect that information, and to what extent taxpayers would simply refuse to give it up, and what the commissioner would do in those circumstances.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo, you know, we have a situation where we had a valuable tax policy tool. It could have done with more guardrails. A way of retaining that valuable tax policy tool would have been to have put more guardrails into it, and yet the Minister chose not to do so. Why not, Minister?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u0022caa2342a817c6e6f9a508e5a71b5713b\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022caa2342a817c6e6f9a508e5a71b5713b\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (10:40)\u003C/span\u003E: I think it is a finely balanced argument, and we understand all the arguments. But I think what has tipped it in favour of the repeal of section 17GB is a couple of things. One is that the nature of that provision, in our view, was overly invasive, to the point where it didn\u2019t adequately protect the privacy rights of taxpayers. The second point would be that it generally wasn\u2019t used often; in fact, it\u2019s only been used once. In terms of a tool, it has been used relatively rarely. With those two factors, we think it\u2019s finely balanced, but we\u2019re taking the decision to repeal it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EJust in terms of the idea around more guardrails, I tend to agree that guardrails for privacy are important, and, in fact, the member pointed out some of the guardrails that currently exist around repercussions for misuse of information data that exist in the system. We think it\u2019s probably a good argument, but we think it\u2019s in the right place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e2a5e972f9a527c8645fb73fe10d75b3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll take a call from Vanushi Walters, but I am going to comment that we are getting more speeches than questions at the moment\u2014from a range of members, actually\u2014so I want this to be concise and clear and I want it to be post - clause 143, which we\u2019ve just discussed, because, as we made a ruling last night, we\u2019re moving forward, and the teams need to be organised and working in that structure.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022 data-id=\u0022f4df9a1850b48568f1f58db863313bba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f4df9a1850b48568f1f58db863313bba\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour) (10:42)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I will be brief. My first question was: why do we need it at all, when the existing framework is protective? The second option for the Government was to adopt some of those protective elements of the current scheme into the new one. So, specifically, I would ask the Minister in the chair, the Hon James Meager, why there is no inclusion of a requirement to give notice of an adverse action. In the current framework, for example, in cases where there could be an offence committed and so you might want to information share, the result is maybe a deportation. The current framework allows for the individual to be notified; there\u2019s notification requirements of a potential adverse action. The new framework doesn\u2019t appear to have that, so if the Minister could advise whether there was consideration for inclusion of some of those protective elements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe second one is on the reporting requirements. The situation as it is allows the Privacy Commissioner to raise concerns with the Minister of Police or the Minister of Revenue, but doesn\u2019t allow the commissioner to require an agreement to be reviewed. Was there consideration, or would the Minister consider, that that is a useful clause to include?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u0022c27dff48fbbe54789fe1d1a55f4703e2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c27dff48fbbe54789fe1d1a55f4703e2\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (10:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019ll just go and address the question from Vanushi Walters about why new section 18HB, inserted by clause 143, is inserted. Essentially, the member pointed out that these kinds of provisions do already exist, in a sense, through the approved information-sharing agreements. The problem with those is that they can take some time to process through. They are helpful for a situation where it\u2019s unclear whether there is public support for a particular information-sharing agreement to be put in place, and so that public consultation is required and helpful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EWhen there is a situation where it\u2019s clear that there is public benefit or public support for information sharing, that\u2019s where this new section 18HB can come into play for a proposal for ministerial information disclosure. It\u2019s a faster tool; it\u2019s used in an instance where there is clear public support for the information-sharing purpose, and also where time is of the essence\u2014for example, it could be relating to a person\u2019s ability to access a benefit or to combat serious offences.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u00225c1309912c64a88bffa91e09f61aa6a8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225c1309912c64a88bffa91e09f61aa6a8\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (10:44)\u003C/span\u003E: A couple of comments and then on to a new section. The Minister in the chair, the Hon James Meager, said that the information-gathering power in section\u00A017GB, repealed by clause 141, had only been used once, which proved it wasn\u2019t really needed. For goodness\u2019 sake, it\u2019s only been in place since 2021, so it\u2019s a very new power, so I\u2019m not surprised it hasn\u2019t been used more often. That doesn\u2019t say that it couldn\u2019t still be used. The Minister also said that it was important to protect the privacy rights of taxpayers. Well, how does that stack up, then, with the huge impost that has been introduced in clause 143, where there is now going to be a whole lot of information disclosed to other agencies and without, necessarily, the strong protections we know Inland Revenue has got in place? Those things really do push against each other, Minister, and I\u2019m really disappointed to hear you advancing those arguments.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cc53a4c74c6df4dfdbe2519d5dba299d\u0022\u003ERyan Hamilton\u003C/span\u003E: Questions, not statements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b62cc9a0bc8f5c014e5b0d19cce51b1\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Take a call. I\u2019ll leave my colleague Vanushi Walters with clause 143 and those very important issues around privacy. I want to move to clause\u00A0153, and that\u2019s the repeal of the legislative provisions for trust disclosure. Now, again, there was a whole set of provisions. We know that trusts are a very commonly used mechanism in this country. We don\u2019t have a lot of information about trusts. Particularly if they don\u2019t earn income, then they don\u2019t have to do a tax return, so it\u2019s very hard to know what\u2019s going on with trusts. They are routinely used for tax-planning purposes, with \u201Cplanning\u201D being an interesting word there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe commissioner was enabled to collect a whole lot more information around trusts\u2014you know, names of trustees, names of set laws, and so on, to try to trace some of the flows around that. This is clause 153, Madam Chair, which repeals section 59BAB.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002221431d62b3c564aad52788df2ea327de\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I\u2019m on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0e70eb414a2983046efa1f3e607c1b1\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL\u003C/span\u003E: Then it was asserted that the commissioner would still be able to collect that information under his existing powers. Could the Minister in the chair please explain those existing powers to reassure that that information can still be collected.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022 data-id=\u0022efe19052d3c4c4a1eae6941abd4f0574\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e641dc4bf8aa41b0bd8a29676c8ba9a6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022efe19052d3c4c4a1eae6941abd4f0574\u0022\u003EREUBEN DAVIDSON (Labour\u2014Christchurch East) (10:47)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to get to some very specific questions in clause 143, section 18HB, the newly drafted section inserted in here. The first is in subsection 3(a)(i): \u201Cthe disclosure is reasonable and\u201D\u2014and, here, the word \u201Cpractical\u201D has been replaced with \u201Cpracticable\u201D; no major issue with that. So no major concern, because that doesn\u2019t really, in effect, make much difference to the impact of that word.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe questions I have, where I think the wording has been redrafted and that does have a material impact on the intention of the clause, is subsection 3(a)(iv), where we\u2019re seeing \u201Cadequate\u201D struck out and replaced with the word \u201Creasonable\u201D. Now, there\u2019s quite a difference between these two words, in my opinion, and I\u2019m interested in getting the Minister in the chair\u2019s opinion on this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u201CAdequate\u201D\u2014for example, if I have a bucket and I\u2019m trying to move water from one place to another, and the bucket has a hole in it, it\u2019s not adequate for the job but it will still do a reasonable job of transferring water from one place to another. But it\u2019s not actually adequate. So replacing the word \u201Cadequate\u201D with \u201Creasonable\u201D would, all of a sudden, imply, having not as strong a safeguard in place to protect the privacy of individuals and the commercial confidentiality of information, that this bill is now prepared to accept a bucket with a hole in it to do that job rather than a robust system that will be watertight. When it comes to the privacy of individuals and the commercial confidentiality of information, I would want a bucket that didn\u2019t have a hole in it to be managing that information.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFurther down in this passage, the word \u201Cretention\u201D has been changed to the word \u201Cstorage\u201D. The word \u201Cstorage\u201D, to me, talks about a method of containing information. It doesn\u2019t give any implication of timeliness; \u201Cretention\u201D does. So the issue here, and particularly in the digital age\u2014and we are well and truly there\u2014is that storage also speaks to digital technology and the potential for digital technology to be used as the method for holding that information. But, again, storage doesn\u2019t explicitly state or imply, as retention does, or did, or would have, a time signature or time frame on that. I\u2019m interested in the Minister\u2019s answers to those questions, not so much about \u201Cpractical\u201D to \u201Cpracticable\u201D, because I think that is a minor change, but \u201Cadequate\u201D to \u201Creasonable\u201D\u2014I see that as being significant.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf someone told me they were going to provide me with adequate protection, I\u2019d be quite comfortable; if they said \u201Creasonable\u201D, I\u2019d want to be asking some questions about what their idea of reasonable is versus what my idea of reasonable is. Similarly, \u201Cretention\u201D to \u201Cstorage\u201D, all of a sudden; a time frame on that isn\u2019t necessarily implied by the use of the word \u201Cstorage\u201D versus the use of the word \u201Cretention\u201D. Some answers to those specific questions would be appreciated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u00225f8969f5bbf45998627ef5978144e689\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225f8969f5bbf45998627ef5978144e689\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (10:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I\u2019ve got a couple of answers that are just overdue. One, I think, was just to round off a question from Vanushi Walters. I think there was a question around why there is no inclusion to give notice of an adverse action in the new information-sharing proposal framework. The adverse action will be included in the ministerial agreement, rather than the framework itself\u2014for example, one of those adverse actions could include reductions in some entitlements.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOn the question from Dr Deborah Russell about trusts\u2019 disclosure powers; the existing trust powers are in sections 33 and 35 of the Tax Administration Act, which enable the commissioner to prescribe and to require taxpayers to file returns as required by the commissioner. I\u2019d just make a comment that I know that the member mentioned that the provisions have been in place since 2021, and that\u2019s not a lot of time, but, of course, that\u2019s five years. I measure time in terms of Tom Rutherford, and that\u2019s about 20 percent of Tom Rutherford\u2019s life. For some people, that is quite an extensive period of time with which you can undertake some action. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFinally, I\u2019ll give some consideration to the difference between storage and retention. From a pure statutory interpretation view of the difference between \u201Cadequate\u201D and \u201Creasonable\u201D, there is a longstanding understanding of reasonableness tests in legislation. They provide for an objective test for what is reasonable in particular circumstances, and that actually takes out that subjectivity of what I think is reasonable versus what you think is reasonable. It\u2019s an objective test, and there is an argument in there that when you require an adequacy test, you could go to the extent of requiring actions to be taken that are unreasonable in the circumstances. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn order for something to be bulletproof, or in order for all of the holes in the bucket to be completely filled and completely sealed, you could block those holes up with plasticine, I guess; you could get your welder out, and you could weld the bottoms of the metal pail together; or you could replace the bucket with an industrial-strength nuclear bunker. That might be adequate to protect something, but it might not be reasonable to do so. That\u2019s, I think, the main difference there. It provides protection for the consumer and protection for the data because you still have to take reasonable safeguards, at which point the adequacy of those will be a consideration in what is reasonable. One person\u2019s interpretation of adequate may be that nuclear bunker, and someone else\u2019s interpretation might be just getting a new bucket that\u2019s fit for purpose. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022 data-id=\u0022323e13384d10f3c17c19a30d86bcfed2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226f607d4079164946af0eb589f5753d1b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022323e13384d10f3c17c19a30d86bcfed2\u0022\u003EVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour) (10:53)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you to the Minister in the chair, the Hon James Meager, for his explanation in terms of adverse actions being included, but in the agreement itself. I would say that there are still rights issues present because you\u2019ve reduced that from a statutory obligation through to secondary legislation. We can\u2019t guarantee that it\u2019s there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy other point to the Minister was that there are other protections in the current framework. There is a question across the board in terms of reporting and advising the individual before the information is shared. There are a number of protections in the current system, and there\u2019s been a choice made not to have them in primary legislation. It could be the fact that they\u2019re in secondary legislation, but, none the less, the point is that they are potentially more rights-infringing because they\u2019re in secondary legislation as opposed to primary. The reason this is important is because this could be biometric data as well. Clause 143, inserting new section 18HB, says \u201Cthe Commissioner may disclose sensitive revenue information\u201D, but revenue information presumably would include a file on an individual that contained biometric data as well. We\u2019re talking about the potential sharing of biometric data; again, the existing framework allows additional protections. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy question is this: if there\u2019s a decision being made to lower those protections to secondary legislation, surely\u2014at least for biometric data, a particular category of private information\u2014we may want to retain the higher protections that are in statute as opposed to secondary legislation, and would the Minister consider that as something that could potentially be lifted into primary legislation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u002203a1c8c48e1c752104d19244b8b4de02\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002203a1c8c48e1c752104d19244b8b4de02\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (10:55)\u003C/span\u003E: I think it\u2019s an interesting discussion because there are obviously trade-offs when you incorporate something into statute versus secondary legislation. One of those is that the benefit of having something in statute provides rigidity and a little bit of untouchability, to a certain extent. The downside is that if that particular provision or condition of storage of biometric data is in primary legislation, there is no challenge to the rights-limiting factor of that beyond a declaration, say.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou could argue that having those kinds of provisions in secondary legislation opens up those guidelines or barriers to challenge under privacy conditions, human rights conditions, reasonableness tests\u2014all under judicial review. There is an argument that, actually, if you\u2019re concerned about the effectiveness of them and whether they are rights-enhancing enough, you have the ability to actually strike down secondary legislation in a way that you don\u2019t for primary legislation. In one sense, you could argue that there are some stronger protections by putting it in secondary legislation, as well as having that flexibility. It\u2019s probably there or thereabouts. We haven\u2019t given consideration as to lifting biometric data into primary legislation at this point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EJust to round off the question from Mr Davidson, I am now advised also that the changes he refers to were actually those suggested by the Law Society at the Finance and Expenditure Committee. Their intention is to align with the wording in the equivalent sections in the Privacy Act and also in the Customs and Excise Act. Part of that will be just a consistency of terminology across statutes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022 data-id=\u00224358e15c44d6d893cced6d27a18bcdd9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224358e15c44d6d893cced6d27a18bcdd9\u0022\u003EMILES ANDERSON (National\u2014Waitaki) (10:57)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001140\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e66b54de7712bd7b8abdee931a904861\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Part 4 set out on Amendment Paper 559 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Part 4 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 4 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022889fa7c112a200a74f5a246f60488abc\u0022\u003ECommittee of the Whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00220190b3448cd73579280ab39fb9206422\u0022\u003EPart 5 Amendments to other enactments and revocations\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022088460448ad5682030dc1df231617dee\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to Part 5. This is the debate on clauses 172 to 192, \u201CAmendments to other enactments and revocations\u201D. The question is that Part 5 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u002258196d82b4816998aab4227438447daf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002258196d82b4816998aab4227438447daf\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (10:59)\u003C/span\u003E: I know we don\u2019t backtrack in these debates, but, just for completeness, right at the end of that last question, Vanushi Walters asked a question around biometric data being in secondary legislation. I can point to examples of that existing already. Biometric data can already be disclosed under approved information-sharing agreements, which are also secondary legislation, so there is precedent for that kind of data.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EPart 5 is the \u201CAmendments to other enactments and revocations\u201D part. It is, essentially, the consequential amendments that give effect to the policy decisions agreed to by the committee at the previous parts. For example, it amends a number of statutes to make a series of administrative and technical changes to give effect to those previous agreed policies\u2014for example, amendments to the KiwiSaver Act to insert a definition of \u201Ccompulsory employer contribution\u201D; amendments to the Unclaimed Money Act to, again, define what a \u201Ctax file number\u201D is. I\u2019ll think of some other interesting examples to take the committee to. We\u2019ve got amendments to the M\u0101ori Fisheries Amendment Act to insert new parts around share transfers, and various other definitional inclusions, as well. It\u2019s a fairly straightforward part that makes the effective changes to other pieces of legislation that are required to give effect to the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u00228cbf576aa029b76b8d0ec67fa9e69f97\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228cbf576aa029b76b8d0ec67fa9e69f97\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (11:00)\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister in the chair, the Hon James Meager, is correct that in the bill that has come back from the Finance and Expenditure Committee, this is a fairly straightforward part. I want to draw the committee\u2019s attention to one change, which I think is just kind of interesting in itself, but then I want to raise an issue that actually makes it not straightforward.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI just want to draw attention to clause 187B. It\u2019s an amendment to the M\u0101ori Fisheries Amendment Act, and there are some matters in there to do with some shares being transferred from Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd. That was an out-of-scope amendment to the bill. We had to go to the Business Committee to get permission to include it in the bill, and it was actually there in order to protect the position of the shareholders there. It was a really important one. We were pleased to be able to include it in the bill at the select committee stage.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bit that is not straightforward, and perhaps the Minister has missed this, because it is not in the bill itself; it is on the Amendment Paper. Now, this Amendment Paper was dropped on Monday sometime, maybe Tuesday sometime. We knew it was coming. I came into the House on Tuesday and looked for the paper on the Table and then looked at the regulatory impact statement and the like on the Table and found a brand new one on student loans. That sits in this part of the bill. These new rules around student loans were not signalled earlier on. They were not signalled in the select committee process. The first we knew of them was when they arrived on the Table this week.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI see the Minister is looking a little disconcerted. I\u2019m going to direct the Minister to Amendment Paper 559. In the original bill, we are looking at the amendments to the Student Loan Scheme Act 2011. That\u2019s on page 93 of the original bill. In terms of the Amendment Paper\u2014and I\u2019m going to urge my colleagues to look at this Amendment Paper too, because this does a whole lot of work. There\u2019s an Amendment Paper and a regulatory impact statement. In terms of the Amendment Paper, we are looking at the new clauses which are now being inserted. It is new clauses 180AB to 180AI. If we look in terms of page numbers, we are going from page 17 to page 20 of the Amendment Paper.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESitting in here are a whole lot of new rules around student loans\u2014not signalled in the bill that was presented to the House in the first reading, not signalled during the select committee process, not signalled at, I think, the second reading. The first we knew of them was when this Amendment Paper and the attached regulatory impact statement arrived on the Table earlier this week\u2014a whole new set of policy, which we actually need to have a pretty thorough discussion of, because there are some quite serious issues sitting in here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt\u2019ll just take me a while to explain this, seeing as the Minister hasn\u2019t. There\u2019s a known problem with student loans. We have a number of student loan borrowers overseas who have very large loan balances, and because they are overseas borrowers, they also have very, very large amounts of interest on those loans. In fact, in many cases, the interest exceeds the amount of the loan itself, the original loan proper. That is now creating a number of problems. There\u2019s a huge problem for the individual student loan borrower. We know of people who simply won\u2019t come back to New Zealand, because they are overseas. We know of people who are deeply stressed by their student loan balances and can\u2019t manage them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt used to be that a student could head off overseas with their student loan balance and pretty much just remain uncontactable, but these days we have some pretty strong information sharing going across tax jurisdictions, actually going to the tax jurisdictions that New Zealanders are most likely to go to, obviously, with Australia and with the UK. So we are now starting to be able to track down these student loans.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe difficulty is, a little bit like with child support, a person\u2014[\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EBell rung\u003C/span\u003E] If I may carry on, Mr Chair; I do want to explain the problem. The difficulty is that, as with child support, the amount of interest and penalties become so great that in itself it becomes a huge barrier to the person doing the right thing and contacting Inland Revenue and sorting out a repayment schedule.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat these set of new rules do is that they enable a person to get in contact with Inland Revenue and to put in place, hopefully, a payment programme by instalment\u2014an instalment package. In that situation, the commissioner, if these rules go through, will have the capacity to forgive some or all of the interest\u2014to write it off. Obviously, we can see straight away a whole set of issues that we need to work through in terms of that capacity of the commissioner to forgive interest debt, provided the person keeps in line with a student loan.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFirst of all\u2014I want to get to a question now, and then we\u2019ll go through it clause by clause. This is a question on the general policy. I\u2019d like to ask the Minister to explain why Inland Revenue, why the Minister, thought that this was a good time to make this change. What is the reasoning behind making this change?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u0022e8d36f9c61bd1d718f2f82a6b8a44f90\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e8d36f9c61bd1d718f2f82a6b8a44f90\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (11:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. As someone who incurred a significant student loan and then stayed in New Zealand, worked my butt off, and paid it off, interest accruing on my loan hasn\u2019t been an issue for me. But for many New Zealanders who choose to engage in our public education system and enjoy the fruits of that system and the support provided by the taxpayer through that system and then head abroad to pursue their dreams and ideas and careers\u2014which is their right to do and something that we love to encourage, as a country that loves to encourage our young people to explore the world, build a career, and then, hopefully, return home\u2014they do incur debt sometimes in terms of interest on their loans. That can be, as the member indicated, quite significant at times. For some of those individuals, that has resulted in debt so large that they disengage from the IR completely.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ECurrently, the position is that the Commissioner of Inland Revenue can only provide relief from late-payment interest on student loans. That is interest which applies when a borrower doesn\u2019t make a payment in time. Under the existing laws, the commissioner does not have discretion to provide relief from interest charged on student loans more generally. You could have an instance where a borrower overseas has accumulated interest, has never made a late payment, but still has significant interest debt. Currently, in that situation\u2014and that applies to overseas borrowers, clearly\u2014the commissioner has no discretion to provide relief at all.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe proposed amendments in new clauses 180AB to 180AI on Amendment Paper 559 would give the commissioner the discretion to provide some relief from that interest. Discretion would be broad in nature, and it could be exercised when the commissioner considered relief was equitable. To qualify, the loan would have to be repaid in full, either in a lump sum or through short-term instalment repayment arrangements, and, after that point, both the loan interest and the late-payment interest would be cancelled for the period of the instalment arrangement, provided that the borrower met all their obligations under the arrangement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo we are trying to find a way in which we can encourage overseas borrowers to pay off their loans more quickly. One of those ways would be to provide an incentive through relief from that interest debt, because we know that the accumulation of debt overseas is an issue, and, as the member pointed out, we have undertaken a number of tools and changes over many years to continue to pursue those who have incurred a debt from the taxpayer and who otherwise would be obliged to pay. But we cannot track them down or chase them up as readily as we can if they were onshore here in New Zealand. We do that more now with our relationships in the UK and Australia, but this is one way of incentivising those borrowers by saying, \u201CLook, if you get on top of it, if you pay off your debt, we can provide you some relief from the interest that may have accrued on that debt.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo that\u2019s the intention behind it. We want to encourage people to reduce the debt they have overseas, and, ultimately, hopefully, in one sense, get them to a position where they do want to return home to New Zealand and build a life and build a family here because they won\u2019t be faced with a very large tax bill when they get here.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022f9e147969e2769d2ff8e8b92d5033408\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f9e147969e2769d2ff8e8b92d5033408\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (11:11)\u003C/span\u003E: I just have a further question on the broad policy level before we start getting into the detail of it, because there are really significant policy issues here. This is just one further question from me and my colleagues, and they have further broad policy questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThere\u2019s an obvious fairness issue here, and I\u2019m sure the Minister in the chair, the Hon James Meager, is aware of it. At one stage, I was overseas paying a student loan, and I did the right thing, paid the amount and so on. There are other students who stay here in New Zealand, and I\u2019m delighted my three daughters are doing that, and they get no interest on their student loans. But there\u2019s a heap of young people who head off overseas, do their OE, have two or three or four great years overseas, maybe stay permanently, but in those two or three great years they acquire real knowledge and skills and expertise and then come back to New Zealand. Many of them do the right things. They\u2019re in contact with Inland Revenue. They work out how much they\u2019ve got to keep on repaying on their student loan. They keep on repaying their student loan, and because they are overseas borrowers, they pay interest as well. These are the people who do all the right things. They\u2019ve paid their loan and they pay the interest, and now those people who\u2019ve done the right thing\u2014and I\u2019m sure the Minister can see where this is going\u2014are going to be faced with a group of people who have not done the right thing, who have not paid their loan, and so have been in contact with Inland Revenue. They\u2019ve done all the wrong things. They\u2019ve taken the money and run, and those people are now going to be let off not only their late-payment interest but now they\u2019re going to be let off the interest as well. So they are going to end up paying less overall than the people who have done the right thing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, I get the reasons for doing this. It\u2019s something we were grappling with in Government and I know this Government is grappling with as well. It\u2019s actually a hard problem. But I want the Minister to talk to those people who have done the right thing and have paid the interest, and could the Minister explain to those people why this is the right thing to do, why it is a good policy even though, certainly at first glance, it looks like quite an unfair policy? What\u2019s the wider consideration that means it is best to pursue this despite the seeming unfairness to some individuals?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u002240d5b7bd6f0bcc761e2f983c353785d3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002240d5b7bd6f0bcc761e2f983c353785d3\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (11:13)\u003C/span\u003E: I could think of an analogy here at home. If you were someone who had committed an offence and that offence had come with, let\u2019s say, a fine, and you\u2019ve got two people, same offence, same fine, and one person chooses to pay the fine on time and incurs no further penalty, the second person chooses whether they have the means or not to pay the fine. Therefore, they incur some penalties on that and may at some point incur a conviction, at which point the court may decide, \u201CWell, in lieu of your inability to pay the fine, we may wipe that debt and we may ask you to do community service instead.\u201D That recognises that there are some situations where having some flexibility may result in a greater outcome because the individual who would be saddled with that debt or that fine may then be able to contribute in another way, and you reduce the overall long-time impost on the taxpayer.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think the general proposition for those people who have done the right thing is that we will always, as a Government, support those people, and we will do everything we can to take both a carrot-and-stick approach. We\u2019re a very fair-minded and evenly balanced Government and while we have the stick with which we can chase people down through the IRD, and say hello to them when they arrive at the border and remind them that they\u2019ve got a debt to pay, and maybe send them friendly reminders through the post, we also will provide a bit of carrot for them as well. I think that is a very even-handed, balanced approach, and it\u2019s a good way of making sure that people are aware of their obligations and do pay up. But we\u2019re also aware that there is a responsibility on the Government to try and recoup as much of those costs as possible. If it means having more debt paid off in a more timely manner, we are willing to take steps to provide some incentives to do so. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor those who have borrowed money from the taxpayer and gone overseas, made a good life out of it, and benefited from the higher incomes and the higher quality of life and the opportunities that higher education and taxpayer-funded education gives them, I\u2019m very proud if they choose to come back and contribute back to New Zealand. Because, certainly, there are people out there who don\u2019t have the privilege or the opportunity to undertake further education and get the private benefits of that, and they are the ones that are out there working in our store houses and our freezing works and on our farms day in, day out, paying the tax so that some of our children can enjoy a higher education and travel the world. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo for those of you who do the right thing and pay your debt and come back, good for you. For those of you who have struggled a bit and have incurred some interest and are thinking of writing it off and never coming back, hopefully this gives you food for thought and an ability to maybe make that decision to pay off your loan and come back home at some point. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002250aceb92220a762e8d0ac69a0edf5cfb\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019ve had some very good contextual discussion on the policy issues; now the nuts and bolts, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022abf42350659c6cb10f48cd185d41dcb1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022abf42350659c6cb10f48cd185d41dcb1\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (11:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and thank you for that, Minister. I want to echo the previous speaker\u2019s surprise when I saw the regulatory impact statement on this particular section, because, literally, the student loan interest rate and the concerns around that has been something that the Green Party has been advocating for quite a while, particularly ramping that up since the middle of last year. So I\u2019m really pleased to see something that the Government is doing, and I also particularly acknowledge the Hon Dr Shane Reti on this as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EYou want to get into specifics, Mr Chair, but I just note that this is my first call. I have some very specific questions, and, I guess, the first question I have for the Minister in the chair, the Hon James Meager, is: when we are looking at the overseas student loan interest rate, one of the fundamental differences we have when it comes to interest rates in general is that, in other areas, the interest rate is determined based on the size of your income, the proportion of your income if you\u2019re paying for a student loan back here in Aotearoa New Zealand. That is not the case when you are overseas borrower. When you have a student loan and you are overseas, your repayment is not based on your income but on the size of your loan. The problem with that, I think, is the misconception, the assumption\u2014and I think the Minister just mentioned this, as well\u2014that when you are going overseas, you are likely going to be in a position where you are  earning more or having a better standard of living. That simply is not the case.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne of the things we hear when we\u2019re talking to overseas borrowers around this is that when you\u2019re in another country, in general, the cost of living is lower but also your salary is lower. If you\u2019re in, let\u2019s say, South-east Asia, you do not actually get a chance to even be able to earn enough to pay off your loan in the first place, which then means that you\u2019re naturally going to accrue interest on that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo my first question is: has the Minister, as part of this package, considered adjusting the interest rate to the income level of an overseas borrower rather than alongside an overseas borrower? That is what\u2019s getting a lot of people in debt. Basically, back in 2021, we were looking at maybe about 52 percent of the people having overdue payments; now we are looking at 75 percent by 2025. So it is obviously clear that this system, in terms of how we are making repayments, is not necessarily working. But, again, what we are introducing here is a good step.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy second question is, when we are looking at this, as part of this package, what sort of allowances is the Minister also being presented, in terms of IRD\u2019s ability to communicate with overseas borrowers, not just in terms of this policy but, in general, about overseas loan payments? The reason I also say that is because one of the other challenges we\u2019re finding with overseas borrowers is, number one, the system is in place to fit the purpose of domestic borrowers without an interest loan, which means that when you are getting an email from IRD about your overseas payment, you are never actually told how much you\u2019re paying. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat we\u2019re hearing is\u2014please, correct me if I\u2019m wrong\u2014you\u2019re never actually told how much interest and how much principal you\u2019re paying on top of that. Anyone with a mortgage will know that your fortnightly payment or weekly payment  or monthly payment to the bank breaks everything down so you know how long it\u2019s going to take you to repay that\u2014that\u2019s not immediately clear. Also, when IRD communicates with overseas borrowers, often there isn\u2019t clear communication. There is an inability to check, in terms of emails, and also, sometimes, it kind of tells you that it\u2019s a six-monthly payment and they drop it on you at the drop of a hat. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESo when we\u2019re looking at this, the other question I have is: what is IRD going to be doing to ensure that overseas borrowers are understanding the size of the loan they have that they need to repay? Because even including the example that we\u2019re seeing here in the regulatory impact statement, paragraph 15\u2014the example that we\u2019re using here with \u201CLana\u201D\u2014often people who left quite early on didn\u2019t necessarily know they had any more loan outstanding and that it has been slowly accumulating. So while the policy here we\u2019re seeing, which is allowing the commissioner changes to the student loan, to get interest but also loan interest\u2014is there a way that we are able to communicate with borrowers earlier on, so they don\u2019t get into that situation in the first place?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u0022d1b19dc8fbc6a2061de810b56cec7d09\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d1b19dc8fbc6a2061de810b56cec7d09\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (11:22)\u003C/span\u003E: I think this might be a case of \u201CIt\u2019s not the size of the income; it\u2019s how you use it.\u201D, in terms of paying it back. So for those who are overseas, they are smart enough to have gone to university, are smart enough to have booked their flights and found accommodation and found work; I think they are more than capable enough of keeping track of their own loans. However, in saying that, if there is more work that the IRD could do to communicate with them, I\u2019m sure that they would be interested in that. It is, unfortunately, outside the scope of this bill. This bill is focused on changes in order to allow for the provision for the commissioner to write off interest, in terms of providing relief.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ESo in terms of the member\u2019s two questions, there has been no consideration to changing the interest rates, nor to changing Inland Revenue\u2019s communication strategy as part of this package. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022 data-id=\u0022b0b4fefe53d63128da525605bb6087c9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223de6e6d6d57d40b483b9b558769ce301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b0b4fefe53d63128da525605bb6087c9\u0022\u003EARENA WILLIAMS (Labour\u2014Manurewa) (11:22)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I want to take the Minister in the chair, the Hon James Meager, to page 19 of Amendment Paper 559\u2014to his new powers introduced at clause 180AF. This is the provision which allows for the relief of loan interest. My first question to him is: if this power was being exercised by IR before this new provision was introduced, how, and was that power outside of their legislative power? Was that by some other regulatory-making power?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI refer him to a report on this recently\u2014as recently as May 2025\u2014where Auckland tax expert Dave Ananth profiled a number of cases of overseas borrowers that he had been assisting with, some of them with six-figure loans that had racked up due to the interest costs, over and above their initial costs, that these New Zealanders owed. He was able to negotiate with IR one-off relief for those students and those were detailed by the reporters who covered those cases. So there are cases, recently, where IR have forgiven debt of overseas borrowers. If this new power is required, then under what power was IR operating when they granted that relief? That is my question to him. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI want to ask this in the context of at the time of that reporting in 2025, the Minister Simon Watts had ruled relief out. He was reported as saying that there would be no forgiveness of that debt for overseas borrowers and he framed this all as a discussion about the moral hazard of New Zealanders overseas and the fairness constraints around that; people should repay the debt that they owe. They knew the rules when they got into it. You can understand that position from the Government. That\u2019s not something that we would be pushing\u2014this sort of \u201Ctough on borrowers\u201D rhetoric\u2014but that was the position of the Minister. So I think this committee is owed a little bit of explanation about why we now have a Minister in the chair who has said, \u201CThere\u2019s a stick there, but we need to use this carrot.\u201D That is a change in the position. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhy is it that when we have a Minister talking up the new powers of enforcement for IR that this bill has actually introduced\u2014more powers of enforcement, and we have traversed them in this stage, and, in the last year, new enforcement powers for IR. Labour members have pointed out that a punitive system and a further punitive system would discourage those skilled New Zealanders from being able to return. It\u2019s, essentially, an argument about labour mobility overseas. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIs it the Government\u2019s position now that labour mobility and a new sort of workforce where we have New Zealanders going overseas to work in Queensland on the building sites there and build their houses\u2014is that now Government policy to encourage New Zealanders overseas, and is this part of that? Is it the Government\u2019s policy that New Zealanders will always go on an OE\u2014as, I think, has been answered in question time in response to the number of New Zealanders leaving overseas by the droves? Is it now the Government\u2019s policy that that sort of labour mobility requires some form of flexibility in these rules, which were ruled out by the Minister in charge of this last year? When we look at those powers of relief that the commissioner can grant in new clause 145A, it also begs the question of when the Minister used the example of a repayer who has repaid every payment on time, has never missed a payment, but is still accruing interest debt\u2014is that the only example here? That would also fit with the Government\u2019s rhetoric around being tough on enforcement, but that\u2019s not what I\u2019ve heard from this Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ve heard that this is about equitable considerations, as well as natural justice, for those people who are seeking genuine relief, recognising that people find themselves in different circumstances. So is it, in fact, the case that the example used here is much broader than it; that someone who has missed a few payments\u2014the 70\u00A0percent of borrowers overseas who have missed some repayments, who have done things a little bit wrong\u2014does it also apply to them? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, how much of the debt? There\u2019s $4.3 billion outstanding that is held by overseas borrowers, yet they make up only less than 20\u00A0percent of the total borrowers. How many of them, who are not coming to this entirely blameless, but they are people who we all recognise: they\u2019re probably members of our family, people we have employed before, people who we know and we\u2019ll see, hopefully, around the Christmas table because they will be able to return to New Zealand; these people who have gotten themselves into a bit of a situation\u2014does it also apply to them? We\u2019re still not clear whether IR, in fact, had the power to forgive their debts before, has been doing this by some other mechanism, and will continue to, in the future, with these new powers, which seem much more than the Minister intended when he commented in 2025.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u00229acf84f877132ff495f08051add92563\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229acf84f877132ff495f08051add92563\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (11:28)\u003C/span\u003E: To the very last point: I understand that the case the member\u2019s referring to was using the existing provisions, which I outlined before, which is that the commissioner can provide relief for interest accrued as a result of late payments. The challenge at the moment is that that is the only thing that the commissioner can provide relief for, not the wider interest burden.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ll also remind the member that the commissioner will be able to consider, and, in fact, will consider every case on its individual circumstances. So if you took into account some of the examples that the member said, where the borrower was not completely blameless when it comes to not making their repayments\u2014perhaps one or two many trips to the South of France in their holiday period, when they could have been paying off the loan generously provided to them by hard-working New Zealand taxpayers\u2014I\u2019m sure the commissioner will consider every circumstance relevant to the borrower to determine if they are, indeed, eligible for relief. Relief is not guaranteed and the amount of relief given will be able to vary. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ll note that the IRD did receive Budget funding in 2024 for additional compliance action, and one focus area was on overseas borrowers. I will note that those very large sticks do apply to borrowers, in terms of the enforcement action that IR can take, but, you know, we are a Government that supports our farming sector\u2014we are the world\u2019s farm\u2014and we are always being pro-carrot, and so we will always have a mix of carrot and stick. If this is something that can encourage some higher levels of repayment so that the taxpayer isn\u2019t continuing to incur this debt on behalf of those individuals, then we think that is something worth pursuing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMy message to all borrowers out there, whether you have stayed onshore or not, is that you are very fortunate to be in the position to be able to go on an OE. I didn\u2019t go on an OE. My parents didn\u2019t go on an OE. Their parents didn\u2019t go on an OE. If you go far enough back, my great-great-great-great-grandparents did go on an OE, but they came on their OE either from Hawaiki or from Cornwall to come here and to make a life for themselves. So for those of you who are privileged to go on an OE: enjoy yourself, make a living, but maintain your obligations and pay your debt back, like the rest of us have to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229ae9bdd7ed6d2f93f744acb536e6e00f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan. Again, we\u2019re getting broad on the policy issue here\u2014on both sides of this discussion, I might say.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022ace2576514c9a0cc837fc0be5dbce063\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ace2576514c9a0cc837fc0be5dbce063\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (11:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I do now want to move on to specific clauses, but, I think, just one small thing on that\u2014and I thank you, Mr Chair, for indulging me to be able to ask my previous questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOne point of clarification I do want to make is, what I\u2019m asking for, maybe, as a part of this package, is to treat the method in which overseas borrowers are paying off their student loan the same as domestic borrowers, where the repayment is based on their income, not based on the size of their loan. Is that something that has been considered? Because that would drastically reduce the number of overseas borrowers, particularly in countries where they may not earn the same income but have a lower cost of living. It will mean that they are less likely to get into debt in the first place and be more prompt in their repayment. So I\u2019m just checking that with the Minister in the chair, the Hon James Meager. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMoving on to new section 138A, inserted by Amendment Paper 559. I want to start with the new section 138A, which is \u201Cthe borrower has entered into an instalment arrangement\u201D, and this is with the commissioner. I wanted to check because in the explanatory note, it does say, \u201Ceither in a lump sum payment or through a short-term instalment arrangement\u201D. If it\u2019s in lump sum\u2014so, basically, the whole essence of this is that we\u2019re looking at waiving the interest, in terms of both the debt and, also, for the loan itself. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI guess, going back, the first question is: in new section 138A(2), it says, \u201Cfrom the date of the instalment arrangement\u201D. If you\u2019re paying off in a lump sum and there\u2019s no retrospective element in terms of the debt accrued by interest or via debt interest, wouldn\u2019t that mean that they just need to pay off the whole total lump sum\u2014as in, the entire amount\u2014and there\u2019s actually no relief? Unless I\u2019m missing a trick somewhere, where the commissioner is able to retrospectively say, \u201COK, I see that you have accrued interest both in terms of your loan but, also, in terms of your debt from, let\u2019s say, 2015 to 2025. If you\u2019re paying off in a lump sum, we are happy to waive the loan interest and the debt interest from 2020 to 2025.\u201D That, I can see as being an incentive. But if you\u2019re saying, \u201Cfrom the date of the instalment\u201D, and that date is when you\u2019re paying off in a lump sum, there\u2019s no retrospectivity, which means there\u2019s no relief whatsoever. Is that a correct assessment?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGoing back, my second question is, if the borrower has entered into an instalment arrangement, let\u2019s say a short-term arrangement\u2014two questions. Number one is: what is \u201Cshort-term\u201D? What has been the average of a \u201Cshort-term\u201D currently? Because, obviously, this is an expansion of the commissioner\u2019s power, so there must be some scope currently\u2014just to get an idea for overseas borrowers who might be paying attention, to go, like, \u201COK, so this is something we\u2019re looking at that\u2019s a six-month thing or short-term expense to a three-year thing, a five-year thing.\u201D It\u2019ll be good to get some sort of range or clarity or average from the Inland Revenue Department.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWith that, does that mean that the relief that we\u2019re seeing for both long interest and, also, debt interest is only, again, for the period of that short-term instalment; from the date of instalment to when they\u2019re supposed to pay it off? Which, potentially, if it\u2019s short term\u2014like, six months\u2014also isn\u2019t a significant relief. It\u2019s a good one, but it may not be as significant if they\u2019ve had this debt for 20 years. Just those few questions for the Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u0022051bbdcf14dcca15421926bff64e0b95\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022051bbdcf14dcca15421926bff64e0b95\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (11:34)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll touch on \u201Cshort-term\u201D soon\u2014I can\u2019t see where that term is being used\u2014but just in terms of the first question around differential payment: that issue is out of scope, and so it wasn\u2019t considered as part of this bill. The bill was just looking at interest relief mechanisms.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThe second question was around new section 138A(2). My understanding, and, hopefully, confirmed by the officials, is that this is the period from\u2014say you entered into an agreement to make repayment over six months; essentially, interest on your debt obligation pauses at that point through to the point you make payment, so that you\u2019re not paying further interest on that. Let me try and explain that a bit better: you make an agreement with the commissioner to make installations over six months to pay off your loan. As part of that agreement, you will get interest relief. You enter into that agreement on 1 January, and you pay it off on\u2014what, six months later? \u20141 June, something like that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a6cb234c103097ec168564921a2c8ba0\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u003C/span\u003E: 1 July.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223b65245d114897e7153fb2170248fe83\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER\u003C/span\u003E: 1 July\u20141 July. The period from 1 January to 1 July, if you\u2019re making those payments ordinarily, would accrue interest, right? You would continue to accrue interest. This says that if you enter into the arrangement and you make the payment in full in that period, the interest that ordinarily would have accrued for that period is just wiped off or cancelled. You don\u2019t have to pay that on top of whatever else is being paid.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002292dd53dbd6569b0d37f74fb83017b673\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002292dd53dbd6569b0d37f74fb83017b673\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (11:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just for the Minister in the chair\u2019s reference, the part that I mentioned about short-term lump sum\u2014to pay \u201Cin full, either in a lump sum payment or through a short-term instalment arrangement\u201D\u2014is on page 22 of the Amendment Paper 559. This is the explanatory note. The student loan discretion to provide relief from interest\u2014second paragraph.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u002291234ce9ced58f02d792c8dfd66a1aa1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002291234ce9ced58f02d792c8dfd66a1aa1\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (11:36)\u003C/span\u003E: OK, I see\u2014yes, it\u2019s in the explanatory note. So, just for clarification, instalment arrangements can be for up to two years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00221176df6f7c3d840b05a290f87c7bac09\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221176df6f7c3d840b05a290f87c7bac09\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (11:36)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair, and thank you, Minister. That\u2019s actually a really good thing to know, in terms of the two years.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBut I want to check, then, following on from the Minister\u2019s response: in which case, if we\u2019re looking at the example that was presented on page 9\u2014so paragraph 15 of the regulatory impact statement\u2014the example with Lana, who had a student loan between 1998 and 2005. In this case, she is someone who had $44,000 in a student loan. By the time she was dealing with the loan that was $120,000; she has then made $77,000. She\u2019s still paying off her loan, but her loan balance is $90,000, over double what she has borrowed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf she decided to make, I guess, an instalment agreement with the commissioner in that case, would that then\u2014my understanding is there is no interest or debt relief for the fact that she has accrued $77,000 of interest rate over that period; it doesn\u2019t take into consideration that she\u2019s already paid more than double of what she\u2019s borrowed, and she will only get relief for the period if she decided to pay the instalments. If you\u2019re looking at this example, she would have $30,000 left. Let\u2019s say, between 2017 to now\u2014we\u2019re looking at a period of nine years, or maybe 8\u00BD years: in 8\u00BD years, she paid $77,000. But what you\u2019re asking for now is not only, under this policy, that she\u2019s not going to get the relief for that amount; she also must then pay off the remainder of, potentially, $30,000 or more within two years, which is more than what she\u2019s been able to pay off up until now. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m just trying to get a sense of\u2014she\u2019s not going to get the relief for older ones; she\u2019ll get a relief for the current ones for the two years that, maybe, she has an instalment\u2014if she\u2019s even allowed to have two years, because two years is the maximum\u2014but, at the same time, she needs to find a way to pay off an even greater amount than what she was able to pay off up until now, in order to try and get a relief for two years. Would that be a correct analysis of that example in the context of what we\u2019re mentioning in terms of new section 138A?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI know that there are other parts of this particular part that others may want to contribute on. I know that we have spent a fair bit of time here on the amendments pursuant to the Student Loan Scheme Act, but I think this is probably one that is quite significant. I want to check, then: if an instalment has been made with the commissioner\u2014let\u2019s say new section 141B, inserted by clause 180AD on Amendment Paper 559, \u201CLate payment interest cancelled if instalment arrangement complied with\u201D, and it does also follow with instances talking about the commissioner\u2019s obligations, \u201Cmust cancel any late payment\u201D, and I\u2019m also looking at it in conjunction with clause 180AF, \u201CNew cross-heading and section 145A inserted\u201D. In new section 145A(2), \u201CThe Commissioner [must have] regard to the circumstances of the case \u2026 if the Commissioner considers it equitable to do so, write off as much of the loan\u201D. That is on the basis that there is an instalment arrangement being made. What happens if, for whatever circumstance, the loan borrower is unable to make a payment as required of that instalment arrangement? Does that mean the commissioner will cancel the whole arrangement if there\u2019s one payment that\u2019s been overdue, regardless of circumstance?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ETo give an example, if someone from overseas, who has a reasonable income, made arrangements saying, \u201CI can do this.\u201D, made an agreement with the commissioner, then the person lost their job and they are unable to make the same payment\u2014will the commissioner look at that with sympathy or with equitability, and say, \u201CIt\u2019s OK. You know, we would want you to maybe pause for this period, if you\u2019re wanting to find a new job, and we are going to continue with an interest rate or a debt rate, etc., but once you\u2019re able to pay it, your instalment plan continues and there\u2019s no more interest or debt.\u201D; or, at that stage, the commissioner\u2019s like, \u201CSorry, you missed a payment. That\u2019s it. We\u2019re reverting back. No interest loan or debt interest relief for you.\u201D? So what happens when we get to that kind of situation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019m just seeing that the Minister in the chair, the Hon James Meager, is getting some advice. If the Minister is ready to, maybe, respond to that, I\u2019ll leave those questions there for now.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u002248ba4e850ec66fc9d443dd61192f72fd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002248ba4e850ec66fc9d443dd61192f72fd\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (11:42)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ll go to the example used. There might be some confusion. Essentially, any arrangement that we would come to would be an arrangement between the borrower and the commissioner as to what they could actually afford to pay back in a scheduled rate. I think that we shouldn\u2019t confuse a situation where this example is used just to show how significantly in debt or behind some borrowers can get when they are overseas borrowers. I can\u2019t speak for whether an arrangement could be made in an example like that, or what the arrangement might be, but that is sort of at the extreme end of the example, right? You\u2019re looking at a borrower whose debt is, essentially, six times the original loan balance. Whether or not this kind of scheme would work for them or not, I\u2019m not too sure, but we don\u2019t want to get confused by just using an example of how interest can accrue and cause people to gather more debt over time. That\u2019s more to emphasise the fact that this is a big problem that we\u2019re trying to address, and that\u2019s why we\u2019ve got the carrot and the stick in play there. I just think that, in terms of the details of specific examples, I can\u2019t really go into them much more than just to look at what\u2019s in the legislation that\u2019s before us.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u0022b25f809dc4cc1da24f3073f9685073c3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b25f809dc4cc1da24f3073f9685073c3\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (11:43)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you for that, Minister. Just, I guess, another question\u2014I appreciate what the Minister in the chair, the Hon James Meager, said in terms of it\u2019s an arrangement between the borrower and the commissioner of what the borrower is able to pay off. Would that, then, be a correct assumption that because, again, this is something where the instalment arrangements need to be paid in full, in which case, if a borrower is unable to meet the full payment within the period of what is considered a short term or a lump sum, that means that a borrower is not eligible to have that kind of agreement with the commissioner and, therefore, would not benefit from this, really\u2014OK, I\u2019m seeing a head nod. Cool. Good to know.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EMy final question for this clause\u2014and I\u2019ll just signal to the Chair that we\u2019re happy to move on to other parts of Part 5, which I know still has quite a few things\u2014is to do with new section 145A(3) and also (4), inserted by new clause 180AF on Amendment Paper 159. In terms of when we\u2019re looking at if loan interest is written off and, also, the commissioner may reverse a write-off, which kind of answers one of the other things that is mentioned\u2014but let\u2019s say, in terms of (3), has there been any modelling done by IRD, in terms of what would be the likely average or what would be the range of the interest write-off, both in terms of at an individual level but also in terms of the total amount level, noting that Australia, for example, just last year, has written off $16 billion in bad student debt? Is there any sort of modelling done, in that case, from IRD on how much in total will be written off and the average?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022 data-id=\u002273fdffe520e1c8607cc39cb572cb1734\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002273fdffe520e1c8607cc39cb572cb1734\u0022\u003ERYAN HAMILTON (National\u2014Hamilton East) (11:45)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b609b34e3ddb79bdab5218a635186b94\u0022\u003EDr Lawrence Xu-Nan\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e629cd7b3e4ef4b43efd3dea20b29c86\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Lawrence Xu-Nan, the Minister is just getting the answer to your last question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u00226b1f145b67a520dc5c3e3706eadce004\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226b1f145b67a520dc5c3e3706eadce004\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (11:46)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. I just want to seek one clarification from you, noting that we do have a very good officials\u2019 team and also a very diligent Minister in the chair\u2014for example, if this part of the debate is closed, would the Chair allow the Minister to still respond to the question in a subsequent part, if the Minister is still receiving advice? Would that be OK with the Chair?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002281acd1cf8beddb2c5ddda820c24e3021\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: We\u2019re happy\u2014the Chair will indulge that in the next part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022193ecab82e82475a46e4b54cba118ba2\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you so much, Mr Chair. That was all I had for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022 data-id=\u0022d1d26e0581dbbb61948efe3bd38a1737\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226aa6725740ef48a8bd0e0d084ac074fc\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d1d26e0581dbbb61948efe3bd38a1737\u0022\u003EMILES ANDERSON (National\u2014Waitaki) (11:46)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d9dc6d7dc54d7969289c3375c207e6c7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Part 5 set out on Amendment Paper 559 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Part 5 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 102\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001236\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 21\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 5 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 1 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 102\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 21\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227ab6ab3c4a6669ec9b69696e5b31364e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Schedule 2 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 2 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 102\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 21\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022b6c7d24e3f1c3ba6eba7fdd277b81b0d\u0022\u003ECommittee of the whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00225e56aef5893395940d468eb69dbaf567\u0022\u003EClauses 1 and 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8afc86ff181c8cbdb2a306d370f531c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to clauses 1 and 2, the debate on the title and commencement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022 data-id=\u0022cfecda5501406050860bdfcf899a4cca\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b13aa8ffbae34ee4972a7ab313f6b300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022cfecda5501406050860bdfcf899a4cca\u0022\u003EHon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) (11:50)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chair, thank you. I just want to make a brief comment, really, on the title of this bill, the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2025-26, Compliance Simplification, and Remedial Measures) Bill. The \u201CAnnual Rates for 2025-26\u201D is\u2014as I discussed earlier, I think, in the second reading, or maybe in the Part 1 debate\u2014a constitutional requirement. It now looks as though we will meet that constitutional requirement, and I assume that the Minister in the chair, the Hon James Meager, is sighing with relief that he\u2019s going to get his bill through, because it\u2019s quite tricky if we don\u2019t.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI do want to just take issue with the next phrase, the \u201CCompliance Simplification\u201D. Frankly, I\u2019m not quite sure what the simplification is, because if we look at the GST and unincorporated joint ventures rules, those are rather complicated. If we look at the new rules for revenue account method taxpayers, which are inserted into the foreign investment fund rules, those are actually rather complicated, too. I pity the people who are going to have to try to sort their way through them in terms of applying them. Then there were further complications introduced in the Minister\u2019s Amendment Paper, so that\u2019s hardly simple law either. In particular, looking at the changes to the thin capitalisation rules around infrastructure expenditure, those are not a simple measure at all. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf we look at all the issues in this bill in terms of whether compliance has been made easier, I don\u2019t think that\u2019s the case at all. In fact, the title of this bill is quite misleading in that regard. I suggest that this bill should be renamed the \u201CTaxation (Annual Rates for 2025-26, Compliance is Never Going to be Simple, and Remedial Measures) Bill\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u002269dd46ae5f34624071e71025cd5d90c5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002269dd46ae5f34624071e71025cd5d90c5\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (11:52)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Just before we go on to debates about the title and how complicated tax legislation is\u2014I\u2019ll defer to the member on that, given her expertise and given that I can spell \u201Ctax\u201D and that\u2019s about as far as it goes in terms of figuring it out sometimes\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c19dab5ddf980ec0c8235f08e68685b8\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: One hopes you pay a little.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022549e1ba2f65fe77e7ad58140d1989346\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, I\u2019m sure we all pay our fair share. We\u2019re obliged to pay.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ELook, I\u2019ll go back just to round off the question from Dr Xu-Nan about analysis done on the likely range of interest write-off. It is complicated. The variation in the amounts and the lengths of time that overseas borrowers or any borrower has had a loan vary wildly. The analysis done shows that the proposal is expected to deliver a modest one-off gain of about $1.5 million to the Crown. While that brings some money in, the value of each loan differs. We think the changes will make it more likely that we can collect amounts that would otherwise not be collected. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EFor example, if you think of some of the very old loans on our books that are of quite low value, if this new power enables the settlement of those loans, we might end up recovering more financially than what the loan\u2019s book value is. That\u2019s, essentially, the extent of the analysis on that. It is a difficult exercise. As members have pointed out throughout the debate, it\u2019s quite difficult to know exactly who is where and what they actually need to be contributing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is the debate on the title and commencement; we\u2019ve already had one call on the title. Again, the title just does what it says: it amends the Income Tax Act in order to set the annual rates for 2025-26, provide compliance simplification, and some remedial measures. I take the member\u2019s points that legislation can be incredibly complicated and sometimes make things more complicated. That\u2019s why we have very intelligent experts in all manners of tax to both teach those of us in the real world who want to learn about these things but also come to the House and teach us here as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn terms of the commencement dates, there are a number of different commencement dates for different sections. There are various reasons for that. I\u2019d invite members to check out the departmental disclosure statement, which gives clear reason for all of the differing commencements. If you take, for example, clause 2(3), which looks at commencing section 73 on the date of 1 January 2009, those of you who are very good at maths will notice that that is in the past. One of the reasons for that is that it looks to deal with crypto assets and, essentially, ties some of these transactional definitions to the date on which those assets came into being, essentially, in the world. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIf members have questions about the commencement dates and want some particular detail, there is some detail for each of those in the departmental disclosure statement. Essentially, most of these dates are coming in at different times to take into account either the complexity in operationalising them\u2014so giving agencies and individuals more time to respond, giving people enough foresight and enough warning to make sure they can prepare for their obligations, and also doing some tidy-ups for those matters that may have arisen in the past that we want to account for when we\u2019re incurring future tax liabilities. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022 data-id=\u002228850adc678eb86904f95662747b379d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bac3dcb6103a48d3bcead8563342a856\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002228850adc678eb86904f95662747b379d\u0022\u003EDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green) (11:55)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Thank you for that, Minister. I do want to address the commencement date, but I actually want to address the commencement date for Amendment Paper 559 and Amendment Paper 560.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI\u2019ll start with Amendment Paper 560. The changes to clause 2 are to do with the increase in the in-work tax credit. It says that it \u201Ccomes into force on a single date set by Order in Council\u201D\u2014that\u2019s in clause 2(25). In clause 2(26): if it \u201Chas not come into force by 1 April 2027, it comes into force then.\u201D My two questions for that are: what would be the date that is set by Order in Council? Is there a rough estimate of when that date is going to be, because 1 April 2027 is the day after this scheme ceases to take effect at all? If the Order in Council doesn\u2019t happen, and it naturally comes into effect on 1 April 2027\u2014if we\u2019re looking, on Amendment Paper 560, at section MF 4L(3)(a)(ii) \u201Cfor the period starting on the change date and finishing on 31 March 2027\u201D\u2014by the time you get to 1 April 2027, there is no increase in base rate by $50 a week.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI think it would be good to reassure everyone that there is a date in mind by Order in Council and it is sometime soon rather than waiting till next year. That\u2019s my first question regarding the commencement date for Amendment Paper 560.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe second one might just be me not being able to see it, and it might be a drafting thing. In Amendment Paper 559\u2014I know we just had a big discussion around clauses\u00A0180A and new clauses 180AB to 180AI\u2014I\u2019m just noting that on page 1 to page\u00A02, at no point, even under amended clause 2(23)(h), do those clauses get mentioned as part of the commencement date. Would you be able to highlight what is the commencement date for clauses 180A and 180AB to 180AI? Have I missed something under clause 2?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EUsually, there is a catch-all phrase\u2014something like, \u201Ceverything else commences on X date\u201D\u2014but I\u2019m not seeing that here. Clause 2(1) of the main bill says that \u201CThis Act comes into force on the day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent, except as provided in this section.\u201D Am I correct, then, to assume that if Amendment Paper 559 doesn\u2019t mention the particular sections we\u2019re looking at\u2014sections 180A and 180AB to 180AI\u2014those sections come into force the day after Royal assent? Would that be a correct assumption? I\u2019m seeing nods, but if I can get a response to my first question, that would be great.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u00224224770f49be6a2d1d55ce37930b806d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224224770f49be6a2d1d55ce37930b806d\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (11:59)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, the date by which the Order in Council will be set is\u2014it\u2019s kind of a tautology, but it\u2019s the date on which the Order in Council will be delivered. It will obviously be before 1 April 2027, because the whole point of this is to provide relief that is timely, targeted, and temporary. In our view, it will be as soon as possible after this bill passes through the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EIn response to the member\u2019s question, just so we get it on the record, about commencement dates generally: yes, clause 2(1) is a catch-all for all sections that aren\u2019t outlined in the rest of section 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221a8ff6e3602c492880b65258f59645c0\u0022 data-id=\u0022f0c47181fea582c0fe7d7375f4fa209e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a8ff6e3602c492880b65258f59645c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f0c47181fea582c0fe7d7375f4fa209e\u0022\u003EDANA KIRKPATRICK (National\u2014East Coast) (11:59)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 55\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e66329e431ea47019b41524c6ef2954a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002286bf34fb45540ca7aa5210cb8e5f619b\u0022\u003ECelia Wade-Brown\u003C/span\u003E: No! Party vote.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226ebe0cbfaef15bfda38b16462524ca2e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve already declared\u2014a little slow, I\u2019m afraid. Members need to keep up.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to clause 2 set out on Amendment Papers 559 and 560 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat clause 2 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 102\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; New Zealand Labour 34; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 21\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill to be reported with amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002200320b2ac6ce3b23c1be0bf082425b15\u0022\u003EOnline Casino Gambling Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00222e238db579211d039be06cb336ed6b20\u0022\u003ECommittee of the Whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001295\u0022\u003EDebate resumed from 10 March.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00222fa0908d094e56650d221736c609046d\u0022\u003EPart 6 Gambling duty and other matters (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226ea3234b759e27180c1f475bb1cfe417\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The Online Casino Gambling Bill. Members, when we were last considering this bill, we were debating Part 6. This is the debate on clauses 80A to 82, \u201CGambling duty and other matters\u201D. The question is that Part 6 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022 data-id=\u0022265e51680961cf029d7999acbe3f18de\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022265e51680961cf029d7999acbe3f18de\u0022\u003ELEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE (Labour\u2014M\u0101ngere) (12:02)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. We have traversed this bill and I\u2019m quite pleased at where we\u2019re up to. I do have an Amendment Paper in terms of this section\u2014Amendment Paper 538\u2014which is on the Table and I\u2019ll just get to it. It\u2019s with regards to new clause 80G.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIn regard to the proceeds from lottery gambling and also the online gambling proceeds\u2014we had some submitters that had an issue with when the funding is coming through, but also I wanted to ask the Minister of Internal Affairs: what advice did she receive in terms of the modelling because the Lottery Grants Board will be receiving the proceeds? What I wanted to ask was: will there be a differentiation between the proceeds from the lottery bodies with the online gambling proceeds?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I wanted to ask\u2014because it was brought through by a couple of the submitters\u2014the issue is around receiving funding or community funding that is returned to the community. Will there be a specific differentiation between what comes through the lotteries side of it and what comes through the online gambling proceeds? The second part of my question\u2014so I\u2019ll just put it how the submitters put it. What they wanted to understand was if it comes through lotteries, that\u2019s clean money; if it comes through online gambling proceeds, that\u2019s termed \u201Cdirty\u201D money. Money is money. However, some of the submitters have an issue applying for funding if it\u2019s clean versus dirty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u0022de5985647d4a562e04dc3cae62c831df\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022de5985647d4a562e04dc3cae62c831df\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (12:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chair. Speaking to the Amendment Paper that the member Lemauga Lydia Sosene raised, Amendment Paper 538\u2014as presiding member of the Lottery Grants Board, I am also aware that there will be people who don\u2019t wish to touch money that\u2019s been from the proceeds of online casino gambling and therefore do not wish to apply for a source of funding from this area. The board is also cognisant of this and will provide for applicants to identify the source of money they wish to seek funding from. I don\u2019t consider that a legislative amendment is needed for this matter, as the board can resolve this matter as a board.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022 data-id=\u0022ee9f2a9b83d69494156a82d94d0cf838\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ee9f2a9b83d69494156a82d94d0cf838\u0022\u003ELEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE (Labour\u2014M\u0101ngere) (12:05)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Minister, for your reply. My Amendment Paper, Amendment Paper 538, does specifically have an addition to an application about how those applying will be able to make their own decision. I appreciate what the Minister of Internal Affairs has said because I, too, am a member on the Lottery Grants Board. It\u2019s just helpful, in part of educating communities when they are going for funding, that they understand where it comes from. But what people wanted to be really clear on is whilst all the funding might go into one bucket, they really wanted to understand that: is there an ability, through the Minister, or did she get any official advice on that differentiation?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u002294c84ce2b0bf067d94e5ee85fbde6e0e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002294c84ce2b0bf067d94e5ee85fbde6e0e\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (12:06)\u003C/span\u003E: As the presiding member of the Lottery Grants Board, I expect to be receiving advice from officials in this area, but I don\u2019t believe a legislative change is needed because the board is cognisant. I, as a Minister and the presiding member of the Lottery Grants Board, am also cognisant that there will be some people who will not wish to apply and receive funds from online casino gambling. We will ensure that it is clear where some of that money is and which funds it is attached to, so that those people who do not wish to have any of those proceeds from online casino gambling do not touch that money.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022 data-id=\u0022a3f2b033eaebb46c5913d8c117b37c3e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a3f2b033eaebb46c5913d8c117b37c3e\u0022\u003ELEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE (Labour\u2014M\u0101ngere) (12:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Minister. I appreciate\u2014and probably traversing all this may be out of scope. Minister, in your role as chair of the Lottery Grants Board, do you think that officials will provide that advice? Even though my question is out of scope at that other mechanism, I just wanted clarity on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u002258329b0a29c98caccacdb570edf3f296\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002258329b0a29c98caccacdb570edf3f296\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (12:07)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I would expect so, because, as the Minister of Internal Affairs and the presiding member of the Lottery Grants Board, I am responsible for the distribution committees, and so therefore will be taking advice in that capacity.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u00224870793ced998e7db69e54dd24cd389d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224870793ced998e7db69e54dd24cd389d\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (12:08)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to ask about service. Because we\u2019re dealing with so many overseas entities, I appreciate that the world is changing rapidly and becoming more networked, but it\u2019s also a situation where post is changing and people\u2019s use of that. In the case of overseas entities, it is more and more easy for people to escape things like the issue of notice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI wanted to know from the Minister of Internal Affairs what advice she has had on that changing area of service overseas, and whether this informed the way that this is structured, and what kind of eye or review of the successive service there would be in the next little while, given that we are dealing with the pointy end of often quite sharp operators in those areas? Will there be any kind of attempt to look at whether those service provisions are fit for purpose, given this particular application of service? Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u0022e88cc25e39368138d7d4d14aa0f9c9e0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e88cc25e39368138d7d4d14aa0f9c9e0\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (12:09)\u003C/span\u003E: I can only assume the member is talking about clause 81 in terms of service of notice. Is that correct?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cfbbfe58dccf0b2a9c922184b25ddc1d\u0022\u003EHelen White\u003C/span\u003E: I am, I\u2019m talking about\u2014yes, 81. Thank you. Apologies for not saying so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002211dfdf7cf0762493ad6f7099a375a3a0\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s all right. I would just point the member to clause 81(1)(a)(iii). It makes it very clear that a notice that can be served on an individual can be served by sending it via email. This is to ensure that cross-border issues can be addressed cross-border rather than requiring a physical person to be present in New Zealand, which gets around any border issues to do with online casinos.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002265aa45ba37fb61c5838fd0e56e546cf3\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221eadea5f70ec74d1a51580e9e76ca9bf\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Camilla Belich.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a5504d785961c07f1d24e956fc2ef04a\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Chair, can I just\u2014aw.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289953bdb9cc25d94279e59aa89887bf0\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m not sure it\u2019s a genuine call, Mr Costley. If it is, let me know.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022 data-id=\u0022585c398bfa65fd18790cd3f6c881496f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022585c398bfa65fd18790cd3f6c881496f\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH (Labour) (12:10)\u003C/span\u003E: I look forward to Tim Costley\u2019s substantive contribution on this part of the bill!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EThank you, Madam Chair. I do have a few questions around Part 6, and the questions I have are in relation to Schedule 2, which, I understand, is part of Part 6, as it refers to clause 82.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296188aa66441d29c7109227fd538516f\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, that\u2019s correct.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224781da7e0ee64557a3bcb565f241de8e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022082ca1eacd7306b4f2cf05c97926c61e\u0022\u003ECAMILLA BELICH\u003C/span\u003E: Even though Part 6 itself is not the longest part of this bill and many of the changes that are in Part 6 have been inserted by the Governance and Administration Committee, the consequential amendments to other Acts are quite a substantive part. I had a couple of questions, and other colleagues will undoubtedly have questions around how these changes will impact on other parts of the Government\u2019s legislative framework. Specifically, I wanted to ask first about the anti - money-laundering practices that will need to occur within this bill. Obviously, we\u2019re regulating a market which is currently unregulated, and I do see that there is, appropriately, as it should be, a link to the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I wanted to know is whether we have any evidence to date that in the regime that is currently being operated in an unregulated fashion, this has had any link or there has been any evidence of money-laundering, or indeed, financing of things like terrorism, which is prohibited under our law, and how those particular provisions will come in under those particular pieces of legislation. I\u2019m just wanting some evidence of what the problem issue is that we\u2019re looking at with the changes to this bill, and currently, if there is evidence that that has been occurring, would the current legislation that is listed there in Part 1 of Schedule 2 actually apply to the existing prohibitions on money-laundering? I think that\u2019s quite a big subject area. I think, because we are dealing with international operators, it will be more incumbent on the Government and on this House to ensure that those are sufficient. I look forward to the Minister of Internal Affair\u2019s comments on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI also wanted to ask specifically about the changes to gaming duties. With this Act, there are some substantive changes that bring the online casino gambling framework within the Gaming Duties Act 1971. Obviously, that\u2019s quite an old Act, I suppose, or an Act that has been around for some period of time. I just wanted to know whether the provisions in here will, effectively, be allowing the taxation of those offshore providers in the same way as other current gambling operators are already providing taxation within New Zealand under that Act. Is the Gaming Duties Act 1971 able to sufficiently, I suppose, account for\u2014I assume it has been amended substantively since 1971\u2014the nature of the online gambling framework? Obviously, it\u2019s a regime that has been around for a little while.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe third issue that I wanted to raise, within Part 1 of Schedule 2, was that there is a specific change to the Tax Administration Act\u2014in Schedule 7, after clause 34A\u2014and there is a slight change that the select committee has made in there, too, which talks about a specific allowance for the commissioner to allow communication to someone who is an employee of the Department of Internal Affairs. I just wanted to know the kinds of protections around these types of disclosures and what types of employees we\u2019re envisioning may be covered by this type of provision. What is the mischief that this provision is trying to avoid, and what are the types of conversations that the drafters were thinking would occur that will then be prevented by the inclusion of clause 34B?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u0022a6281ff97ddc2238d4fefca0df4801f1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a6281ff97ddc2238d4fefca0df4801f1\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (12:15)\u003C/span\u003E: To answer the first part of Camilla Belich\u2019s question, she asked about the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act (AMLCFT) requirements within the law. The bill does bring online casino gambling operators under AMLCFT regulations because we are aligning it with existing explicitly covered and treated regulations for other forms of gambling here in New Zealand. The Government doesn\u2019t have any specific evidence of any issues of this nature currently, because it has been an unregulated market, which means that the Government hasn\u2019t been capturing information in this area. However, going forward, this will bring it into line with physical gambling here in New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ECamilla Belich also asked about the gaming duties and whether the provisions allow taxation of offshore operators. Yes, I can confirm that they do. They are already paying a duty tax under other legislation, such as GST, but, at clause 34B, we are removing this, and the answer is no, the Government Amendment Paper addresses this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u0022074e5fe771322a8cdcdf1e1d0adf8f22\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022074e5fe771322a8cdcdf1e1d0adf8f22\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (12:16)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I haven\u2019t been on the Governance and Administration Committee on this matter, but I\u2019m interested in the changes to dates. It\u2019s Part 2 of Schedule 2, new regulation 7A. I can see that there has been a decision to take out a simple rule of the 20th day for the returns, and there is a more complicated approach further down in that new regulation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI\u2019d just like to understand why. I\u2019m particularly interested in whether that is something that is common to other practice. Really, it is just the why: why are we changing that in the way we are? Has there been a problem with that more simple approach? I\u2019m very keen to hear from the Minister of Internal Affairs on that practice. I appreciate it might be for a very good reason. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u0022719eb25399b638d27fe438f5960c2038\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022719eb25399b638d27fe438f5960c2038\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (12:17)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. The member Helen White refers to the dates at new regulation 7A(1)(a). This aligns with the Inland Revenue tax payment dates.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022 data-id=\u0022dfb669f3dfe30508551a26644a203a8f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022784f4e929aed4ea6a05d1a10add6eccb\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022dfb669f3dfe30508551a26644a203a8f\u0022\u003ERYAN HAMILTON (National\u2014Hamilton East) (12:17)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aff19b6d75495eb0930bd7a3b6afdd2e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Lemauga Lydia Sosene\u2019s tabled amendment to Amendment Paper 530 replacing new clause 80E be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment to the amendments be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment to the amendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226da20037c2efdf0189d10d76472dca33\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Mike Davidson\u2019s amendment to Amendment Paper 530 amending clause 80D set out on Amendment Paper 558 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment to the amendments be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment to the amendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228b651718cb59e07d768f92b802023d22\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Part 6 as set out on Amendment Paper 530 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendments be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e284502968c84c2230a7a80f8276e55c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Lemauga Lydia Sosene\u2019s amendment to insert new clause 80G as set out on Amendment Paper 538 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Part 6 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 6 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022310bd7da43518b55659ce54a9dfe47d4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Now, we come to the voting on Schedule 1, where there\u2019s no further debate. The question is that Lemauga Lydia Sosene\u2019s amendments to Schedule 1 as set out on Amendment Paper 561 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendments be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 1 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f642a063396ce9f25c8cab68c2b6854\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that the Minister\u2019s amendments to Schedule 2 as set out on Amendment Paper 530 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendments be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227fce437f667ca5c6ad741aa1f52bf890\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Tamatha Paul\u2019s amendment to Schedule 2 as set out on Amendment Paper 507 is ruled out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMike Davidson\u2019s amendment to Schedule 2 as set out on Amendment Paper 543 is ruled out of order as being inconsistent with a previous decision of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat Schedule 2 as amended be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESchedule 2 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002284a0332e867cf5d8250ebba32fdfbd2a\u0022\u003ECommittee of the Whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u00221771887c5cbc63aa8e1b230e369bc996\u0022\u003EClauses 1 and 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227f682de6f82e08bb711e032de1377e1c\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, we come now to our final debate. This is the debate on clauses 1 and 2\u2014\u201CTitle\u201D and \u201CCommencement\u201D. The question is that clauses 1 and 2 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u00227de7016d76fb6f23f85c2c2541e1266c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227de7016d76fb6f23f85c2c2541e1266c\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (12:27)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019d like to take a call to discuss the title of this bill, and I appreciate that often people put up flippant things in terms of those titles.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c87284354f2b51f1c04ca93adecf78de\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: A truer word was never said.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a4b269852ab4c821f7cf66785f8eee07\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha! I\u2019m not intending to do that at all. I wasn\u2019t on this committee, and then I looked at the report and I saw that the Greens have made the point that, in the Cabinet paper, it was seen that one of the primary purposes of this bill was actually revenue gathering. Now, I think that the public need to understand that, and I don\u2019t see that as being made apparent from this title.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI would like to know from the Minister of Internal Affairs whether she accepts that that\u2019s what the Cabinet paper said, because I\u2019m looking at this here and I\u2019m seeing it. I\u2019d like to know where she sees that in the schedule of purposes of this bill, because I am very concerned we are dealing with a group of very vulnerable people; in particular, we\u2019re dealing in my area of Mt Albert with groups that are very concerned about the addictive nature of online gambling to young people in particular and that we might be gathering that very revenue from a vulnerable group. I have Asian Family Services in my network of people I constantly talk to, and they are particularly concerned about the nature of this gambling in the Asian community and that it really is very destructive of families and is really undermining those communities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EWhat I would like to suggest as a title here is that we simply, straight as a die, put into the title that this is \u201CRevenue Gathering From Online Casino Gambling\u201D. It\u2019s not treating it any differently from anything else, but it\u2019s straight as a die\u2014this is the purpose of what we\u2019re doing. If it isn\u2019t what the Minister is prepared to accept this bill actually does\u2014and that\u2019s what our title should do; be very straightforward about this\u2014I\u2019d like to know why she rejects that title as more informative to the public about the nature of what is going on here. I look forward to her comments. Thank you, Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u00225e00748ec469c50db546c36c67258e93\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225e00748ec469c50db546c36c67258e93\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (12:30)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Look, I\u2019m as big a fan as any that the law should be given a title that does what it says it does. I think for anybody who is trying to find what the rules are around online casino gambling, making sure that the title says \u201COnline Casino Gambling Act\u201D makes that exceedingly apparent, and there shouldn\u2019t be any misunderstanding of where to go to find the rules.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003ETo the member Helen White\u2019s questions and the suggestion of changing it, I do reject that. The system itself enables revenue gathering, but its purpose is to regulate the unregulated market, which takes us back to: how would somebody find what the rules of the regulations are? They would google \u201Conline casino gambling\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022 data-id=\u00226615a6d9f2dc2b328752cc115e1b2486\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226615a6d9f2dc2b328752cc115e1b2486\u0022\u003ELEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE (Labour\u2014M\u0101ngere) (12:31)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the Minister of Internal Affairs\u2019 answers for the title and, also, her contribution. I want to ask the Minister specifically around commencement, and I do have an Amendment Paper 561 in. One of the concerns, as you\u2019ve heard in some of the contributions, is the impact. Labour agrees with the regulating of this industry; however, we have some concerns in terms of the speed of the amendment bill. We also have concerns about the impact in our community. Members\u2019 contributions from this side of the Chamber have raised the impact on our young people.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ERather than make a speech about it, the Amendment Paper is very clear in terms of the commencement date and the reasons behind us requesting, from this side of the House, that it is important to understand that whilst the bill brings in revenue, it is the impact and the unknowns of online casino gambling. Many of our submitters talked about how young people will have access\u2014and they do now, in an unregulated platform\u201424/7. The concern is that online casino gambling will be available 24 hours, seven days a week. The difference with the land-based casinos is that you have to physically go there. You have to get in your car and physically go there, and there are restrictions there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe reason for our push in terms of consideration for commencement\u2014we know that in New Zealand, we have something called social media influencers. Some of our young people are being lured by overseas offshore companies that, if they do this, put out a service or have a product, they\u2019ll get that\u2014they\u2019ll get a big payment. The Department of Internal Affairs have got some very clear guidelines and restrictions. What I\u2019m asking is, in terms of the Minister\u2019s decision, what advice was given to the Minister\u2014we heard a number of submitters raise their concerns about vulnerable groups in our society that are going to be saturated in terms of advertising, in terms of what\u2019s available. Can the Minister explain what advice, what modelling, the exposure to young people\u2014all of these important issues in our community?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u00227a8a59c4aa090b8277ead302ee62da85\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227a8a59c4aa090b8277ead302ee62da85\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (12:34)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Just starting at the end of that member\u2019s contribution, we\u2019ve already traversed social media influencers and advertisement restrictions within other parts of this bill. I acknowledge that was on a different week, but we are on this week now, on a different part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EI also want to acknowledge that the member\u2019s contribution talked about how, when this law commences and comes into force, it will make online casino gambling available. There was a response from this side of the House: well, it already is. We are commencing this year with the law because the market has been unregulated for far too long. I acknowledge the Labour Party could have regulated it, but they didn\u2019t. It\u2019s been unregulated for far too long already, and it means that if we pushed any time frames out, consumers would be continuing to participate in online casino gambling online with no harm minimisation and consumer guarantee standards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002248a79ba9a96a577cef729331632c68e4\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019m going to take a call from Helen White, but I do want to say that the last speech strayed quite a long way from commencement, so they need to be very much on point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022 data-id=\u0022bd8d36308ff4415961ee755b50e1279f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bd8d36308ff4415961ee755b50e1279f\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE (Labour\u2014Mt Albert) (12:35)\u003C/span\u003E: All right. I think the issue of commencement is the one I\u2019d like to speak about in this contribution. The member will be aware that it\u2019s very recent that we have come out with an online harm collaboration in the select committee, which was the Education and Workforce Committee. It really is a very interesting piece of work, because there was an exploration where almost every party\u2014I think, save for the ACT Party\u2014has come up with a real addressing and a suggestion that there was a lot of harm being done\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022124abfa11e62147167dddeeca577f8fc\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: So is this\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022443f23de4cbd464f91833e6c466c98c0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c5268b04062634f5dea30eb9e0638f32\u0022\u003ETodd Stephenson\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226de84ff974d7967ca37f702360db0c04\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I think I might be about to address the member\u2019s point of order, so please make it again if I don\u2019t. This is title and commencement\u2014very tight.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c76e438ffa1cb669976dc93aa8944781\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE\u003C/span\u003E: OK, maybe if I start with why it\u2019s important to commencement\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225d786ea9505f0b15c7e0e275818fefab\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I think just go to title and commencement, because we\u2019re traversing things that have already been said and not necessarily relating to this piece of legislation\u2014title and commencement only.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002232632704a2594ee1b96e617d06beae80\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226b1f297a2e836faa92d49e44bd1214e4\u0022\u003EHELEN WHITE\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. My point is that in a world that\u2019s changing so rapidly, the commencement of this bill at this time when this work is starting to be cross-party and there\u2019s an understanding of the harm of addiction in this area, particularly for young people\u2014it is a moving feast. It would be very helpful to see whether the Minister of Internal Affairs has considered that work and the capacity, perhaps, to move the commencement of this out long enough for that work and that understanding to be actually looked at. It is so relevant to the harm that\u2019s being done in the area. It really is a new area for us all as parliamentarians, so I\u2019d like to know whether she\u2019s considered moving the time out long enough to talk to some of those stakeholders. I\u2019m thinking about people like Holly Brooker and the people who\u2019ve been doing the work in that area of online harm for children. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u002286d7edd70c2bae85e7097130be4d76d6\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002286d7edd70c2bae85e7097130be4d76d6\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (12:37)\u003C/span\u003E: Look, I hope I can close this out pretty quickly. The member Helen White has been here long enough to know what a title and a commencement is. That contribution had nothing to do with this law, and I think it makes a trivial mockery of the parliamentary process that we\u2019re here for today. I would suggest that this debate is actually closed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d9977325bf96c62dedc07b08e2a9d625\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: I think the Minister should leave the job of deciding when we close to me. There was a vague link to commencement there, but I am getting frustrated with the broadening-out of these speeches, so one more chance\u2014Lemauga Lydia Sosene.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022 data-id=\u00223b7fd3d906ce7ba1d92dc68a4f5c81a9\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223b7fd3d906ce7ba1d92dc68a4f5c81a9\u0022\u003ELEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE (Labour\u2014M\u0101ngere) (12:38)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you that you are allowing one more question on commencement\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bac07700aacdde2aaa058152831947a3\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: On commencement.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aa2671c080378d2db62eaee1515d4b21\u0022\u003ELEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE\u003C/span\u003E: You have said to be specifically tight, Madam Chair. To the Minister of Internal Affairs: the commencement date is really important, specifically with the self-exclusion register. What we have before us\u2014and I\u2019ve got an Amendment Paper there, and why it\u2019s important is the horse will have bolted before the cart comes along, in terms of\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cc78d791421b66fd0d63ae837ac39230\u0022\u003ETim Costley\u003C/span\u003E: I think we\u2019re mixing our\u2014it\u2019s a real kettle of worms, this speech.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022258b65104d9046dfb49eb940c68bddda\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f34ecc3feee55f5aefb2b27e38fd7ca5\u0022\u003ELEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE\u003C/span\u003E: You\u2019ve got an amendment bill here\u2014you\u2019ll have your time\u2014and the provision is to allow it to begin, but the self-exclusion register will come at a later date. The question that I have is: what advice did the officials provide in terms of the self-exclusion register for the commencement date?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022 data-id=\u00225b1cbce86e84b391c915a52403eb23ed\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222204e041e14c40fcbec76cc14f0da486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225b1cbce86e84b391c915a52403eb23ed\u0022\u003EHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (12:39)\u003C/span\u003E: Look, I\u2019ll make it really simple, because I know that the self-exclusion register came through the Education and Workforce Committee. This Government has a mission to regulate the online market. We are progressing with the law, with the regulations that the Government had signed off on. As a Government, we have accepted that there was a change at the select committee for this additional area of regulation, which is why there is an extended date for those regulations to be made, because the other ones are already in train.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b618b847a57b4afb94b76eaea9e042a5\u0022 data-id=\u002252948912338ee20a6c5c590e12688a4d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b618b847a57b4afb94b76eaea9e042a5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002252948912338ee20a6c5c590e12688a4d\u0022\u003EDr CARLOS CHEUNG (National\u2014Mt Roskill) (12:39)\u003C/span\u003E: I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat debate on this question now close\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat clause 1 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 1 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223359d9cd8cf07e30c20c9b0f8671a96a\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Oriini Kaipara\u2019s tabled amendment to clause\u00A02 is out of order as referring to an indeterminate event and not providing sufficient certainty.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe question is that Lemauga Lydia Sosene\u2019s tabled amendment to clause 2 replacing \u201C1 May 2026\u201D with \u201C1 January 2028\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendment be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002245f32527ea80f1092c5b47c8bddbacc7\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: The question is that Lemauga Lydia Sosene\u2019s amendments to clause 2 as set out on Amendment Paper 561 be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the amendments be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat clause 2 be agreed to\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EAyes 68\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003ENoes 54\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori 5; Ferris.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EClause 2 agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill to be reported with amendment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00226163dd7ad0927fe16fa6a18863b7e9f0\u0022\u003EAntisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00227d9d820e4128a47e62fbf801b6fc6142\u0022\u003ECommittee of the Whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsClauseHeading\u0022 id=\u0022dbfd4cab016b66447f29ac5355fec587\u0022\u003EPart 1 Amendments to Land Transport Act 1998, and Schedules 1 and 2\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f70aa8a3db2165e201d91060b57f2725\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: Members, the House is in committee on the Antisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Bill. We start with Part 1. Part 1 is the debate on clauses 3 to 23\u2014\u201CAmendments to Land Transport Act 1998\u201D\u2014and Schedules\u00A01 and 2. The question is that Part 1 stand part.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u00225c945f3b0b180b6184d0b3326f92f7dc\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00225c945f3b0b180b6184d0b3326f92f7dc\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Associate Minister of Transport) (12:45)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. We are all aware of what this bill does. It deals with the growing issue, over the past couple of years, of antisocial road behaviour. Colloquially, I think, that\u2019s known as the bad activities of boy racers, but, of course, it\u2019s 2026; we\u2019ve got girl racers\u2014we\u2019ve got all kinds of racers. Sometimes, those racers terrorise our neighbourhoods and terrorise our roads. Now, I know that, in places like Christchurch, there are various by-laws and restrictions in place, including anti-cruising laws around the centre of Christchurch. That may come as a surprise to some members in the Chamber, but if you go around Christchurch, you\u2019re not allowed to cruise around Hagley Park at certain times of the day. For those of you who wish to join us in the South Island, do so sensibly, but do not be cruising in and around Christchurch.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, that\u2019s no help to some areas of the public around our country who are terrorised by really poor behaviour on our roads. I\u2019m talking of things like intimidating convoys. We\u2019re talking about groups of motorists who are determined to do nothing more than spending nights and early hours of the morning doing burnouts on roads, terrorising the neighbourhood, and generally just creating dangerous or reckless situations for the general public. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThis is the piece of legislation that is aiming to address some of those issues, and, in particular, this part we\u2019re talking about, the part that amends the Land Transport Act, does a lot of the heavy lifting in terms of creating a new offence of dangerous or reckless activity. It also provides the police new powers to request information connected to some of those offences. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, of course, the police have powers to require or ask for information on some occasions now, including when someone has failed to stop. If anyone has done the Otago University first-year law exams, I recall we had to memorise six out of 10 essays. One of those essays was interpreting the \u201Cfailure to stop\u201D section, so this gives me a bit of a throwback to my law career, and I\u2019m glad that we are now providing the police some additional powers to require that information. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EOf course, when these large convoys or when these large gatherings appear and are creating chaos and havoc, it can be difficult to determine who is responsible for those vehicles in order to take the enforcement action later on, such as impounding those vehicles, forfeiting those vehicles, and perhaps even, maybe, crushing those vehicles. This part makes amendments to the Land Transport Act to provide some powers and some enforcement mechanisms in those areas. I\u2019m sure members will have some significantly interesting questions and contributions to make.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022 data-id=\u00221c5c496c5ab6e37b6db90e3f48057568\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ab32b09663ea48b199aa59e4d88f77e4\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221c5c496c5ab6e37b6db90e3f48057568\u0022\u003ETIM COSTLEY (National\u2014\u014Ctaki) (12:48)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do want to take just a moment to ask the Associate Minister of Transport, the Hon James Meager, about this because, as I\u2019m sure the Minister is aware, this has been an issue in my electorate in Levin and \u014Ctaki and some of the other areas. It\u2019s something I\u2019ve been advocating for to the Minister for a while. I even have drafted member\u2019s bill legislation, but, of course, thankfully the Government has chosen to act, seeing the wider issue, and bring this in. I do just want to seek his reassurance that this is going to suitably address that because I think of the two significant events that took place in Oxford Street in Levin. We had police officers assaulted during one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003EAlso, there\u2019s a need to be able to conduct that follow-up action to go and bring meaningful consequences that will deter further efforts. The police, in the second instance, did a tremendous job in shutting this down and seizing them, but they need the tools, and I want to make sure they\u2019ll be in place. I\u2019m thinking of the residents I met with in places like Miro Street in \u014Ctaki and Oxford Street in Levin, and even the old Main North Road in Waikanae. I just want to get some assurance\u2014not just for me but for the people that might be watching or engaging with us online\u2014that this tools up the police and it gives them some more powers to go after them, it brings in meaningful consequences, and it\u2019s going to enable us to reassure local citizens that we are giving the police the tools to actually go after these guys and bring some consequences back.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u00227130b7cd46e8438fe9007877e1120f22\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00227130b7cd46e8438fe9007877e1120f22\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Associate Minister of Transport) (12:49)\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s an excellent contribution. I think it shows the value of good, strong, local representation on issues that are important to parts of the country like \u014Ctaki, like K\u0101piti, like Lower Hutt, and like central Christchurch.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThe bill does a number of things to address Mr Costley\u2019s concerns and the concerns of the community in \u014Ctaki. It creates some new offences for those who are engaging in reckless behaviour. It creates new offences for intimidating convoys, so not only are you having the case where you have to be stationary in one place causing issues but if you are actually travelling on the road and using your behaviour to intimidate other people\u2014maybe up and down the State highway there, \u014Ctaki to Levin and north of Levin\u2014causing a whole lot of issues on the road, it creates offences for those, too. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EIt gives police greater powers to identify those who are involved in street racing. It gives the police powers to actually close off those roads where those activities may be undertaken, to take some preventative action, and also to make sure that we can better deal with these issues. It introduces new $1,000 infringement fines and court-ordered fines. It increases the fines for excessive noise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAnother thing it does is it allows police the ability to impound those vehicles, so that those individuals who are facing the consequences of their actions do not go and sell them off to their mates on Trade Me Motors or on Auto Trader NZ\u2014if they still do that\u2014and avoid the consequences of their behaviour. So to the people of \u014Ctaki, the people of Lower Hutt, the people of Christchurch, you can be assured that help is on the way with this legislation.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022 data-id=\u00226eb8df914a920d2ec404511de27b0643\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b78723aefdc74b11a47482993ca56a74\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226eb8df914a920d2ec404511de27b0643\u0022\u003EHon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour\u2014Christchurch Central) (12:51)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Madam Chair. That\u2019s great to hear that from the Associate Minister of Transport, the Hon James Meager, and to see a little bit of electioneering for the member over there. These no-cruising signs in Christchurch that the Minister alluded to are actually quite amusing because there are signs everywhere that say, \u201CNo-cruising zone ends here.\u201D I\u2019m assuming that means that that is where the cruising zone starts. If the no-cruising zone ends, the cruising zone must start, and it\u2019s not far from where I live.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EActually, my first question is about one of the centrepieces of the legislation, and it\u2019s new section 39A, inserted by clause 10, which creates the offence of \u201CDangerous or reckless activity offence conduct in frightening or intimidating convoy\u201D. It just strikes me\u2014and the Minister might want to comment\u2014that this would be quite hard to commit, because to do so, the first thing is that to prove it you have to prove that they\u2019re engaging in a dangerous or reckless activity offence, right? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ESubsection (2) lists those. For example, reckless use of a motor vehicle\u2014what it\u2019s traditionally called\u2014would be one. That\u2019s already a very serious offence. In fact, I believe it\u2019s an imprisonable offence. So you\u2019ve got to be engaging in road use that\u2019s already illegal, at almost the highest level; not just careless use of a motor vehicle but reckless or dangerous use of a motor vehicle. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen it says, \u201Cand (b) operates the motor vehicle\u201D, so that\u2019s just being the driver or the user of the motor vehicle, and is \u201Cintending it to frighten or intimidate\u201D, and\u2014another \u201Cand\u201D\u2014operates that motor vehicle as part of a convoy. You\u2019ve got to have four elements: committing a serious traffic offence, being the operator of the vehicle, being in convoy, and being frightening and intimidating. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, it strikes me that you could get a convoy that\u2019s frightening. I think the general public thinks this is what they\u2019re doing: that if there are three cars with stereos blasting and people yelling out the windows, now, that\u2019s not dangerous or reckless, but it\u2019s frightening or intimidating. But you actually have to be doing something which is already an offence\u2014for example, driving not just over the speed limit but dangerously over the speed limit. That would catch it. Or drifting around a corner, which the Minister might not know, but that means when you lose traction and it backslides.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EI mean, I guess my point is this: is it the Government\u2019s intention that a convoy of two cars going a bit fast, being loud and threatening, is caught, or does it actually intend that that additional aggravating factor of there being a very serious traffic offence being committed at the same time is intended? It\u2019s those four \u201Cands\u201D in there which are the challenge. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EThen, of course, embedded in that section is the other tricky thing, which is intending it to frighten or intimidate another person. Now, if you know any boy racers or girl racers\u2014car enthusiasts\u2014in fact, they don\u2019t think very much at all. They don\u2019t intend to intimidate; they intend to be cool, so I guess that kind of intention thing seems to be a little perplexing. They don\u2019t actually think ahead, so knowing that or being reckless that\u2014they\u2019re not knowing or reckless either; they just don\u2019t even think about it, because recklessness is wilful blindness. They\u2019re not wilfully blind; they\u2019re just stupidly blind, which is an entirely different thing. I\u2019m struggling to see how that particular section will operate in practice, and if the Minister wants to comment on that, that would be useful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022 data-id=\u00220e2185b2439c167fed84186c03b907ac\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225459b3c0726d42c1b6d3cc94ec303baa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220e2185b2439c167fed84186c03b907ac\u0022\u003EHon JAMES MEAGER (Associate Minister of Transport) (12:54)\u003C/span\u003E: There was a lot in that contribution from Dr Webb. I think one thing we can say with certainty from that contribution is that he wasn\u2019t electioneering, because of course he\u2019s going to leave us at the end of this term of Parliament, and we will miss his insightful judicial mind and his forensic analysis of bills clause by clause, and also his contribution to the Justice Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENow, of course, the Government\u2019s intention in this bill is to prevent dangerous or reckless activity being undertaken whilst travelling in a convoy. That activity needs to be intended to be frightening or intimidating to another person, or being reckless as to whether or not it is likely to be frightening or intimidating to another people, and the activity that they undertake has to be dangerous or reckless conduct as defined under subsection (2). They also have to be operating the motor vehicle and have to be engaging in that conduct while operating that motor vehicle as part of a convoy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EDr Webb has asked and answered the questions about what the Government\u2019s intention is. It is intended to create this offence to stop those very dangerous, very reckless, very frightening, very intimidating convoys that are going up and down our highways, up and down our motorways, in and out of our leafy suburbs, all through central Christchurch, causing chaos and frightening people on the road. We think that\u2019s a bad thing and we\u2019re going to stop it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1f5a36246103eba5ba8fa9d8d4c8155\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger)\u003C/span\u003E: With that, it becomes time for me to report progress. Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EProgress to be reported.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f398d77a717f11fe568480f92f4870e3\u0022\u003ETaxation (Annual Rates for 2025\u201326, Compliance Simplification, and Remedial Measures) Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f398d77a717f11fe568480f92f4870e3\u0022\u003EOnline Casino Gambling Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f398d77a717f11fe568480f92f4870e3\u0022\u003EAntisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002264f4cea2e2dd51e1cdc3054c2c3736e7\u0022\u003EReport of Committee of the Whole House\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022 data-id=\u0022eda4c096a89be6eded89c3971247520e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224cf6752dabf34d0eb8ae92457823e4ba\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022eda4c096a89be6eded89c3971247520e\u0022\u003ECHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger) (12:55)\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Speaker, the committee has considered the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2025-26, Compliance Simplification, and Remedial Measures) Bill and reports it with amendment. The committee has also considered the Online Casino Gambling Bill and reports it with amendment. The committee has also considered the Antisocial Road Use Legislation Amendment Bill and reports it has made progress on the bill. I move, \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsCharacterItalics\u0022\u003EThat the report be adopted\u003C/span\u003E.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c4943fd1cf914de0befcb7a16280f910\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022567a5c1ddb92c810e51786cc0880a4cc\u0022\u003EASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O\u0027Connor)\u003C/span\u003E: The House stands adjourned until 2\u00A0p.m. today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id20260325e648bcf08613a3d090001498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsContinued\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022CharacterBoldCentred\u0022\u003EThe House adjourned at 12.55 p.m. (Thursday)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n  \u003C/body\u003E\n\u003C/html\u003E"