1. Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
Does he stand by his statement that by early 2010 New Zealand will be coming out of the recession “reasonably aggressively”?
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) Link to this
Yes, I stand by my full quote from March 2009, which is: “… I think by the end of 2009 early 2010 this time next year we’ll be starting to come out of that and I think starting to come out of it reasonably aggressively. I’m more optimistic about 2011 than 2010 but nevertheless I think 2010 will be positive.” Those statements have proved to be absolutely, entirely, 100 percent correct.
Two years into his Government does he take responsibility for the economic results that came out today, which were much worse than Treasury estimated 6 months ago, or will he continue to blame everybody else for his failure?
Well, I cannot take responsibility for a global financial crisis, although Michael Cullen once blamed me for it. I cannot take responsibility for an earthquake. I can take responsibility for doing something about leaky homes—the previous Government did absolutely nothing for homeowners—and I can take responsibility for New Zealand having the best tax switch it has had in 25 years.
Will he then take responsibility for the fact that a large part of that deficit was because this economy has not performed under his management over the last 6 months, as Treasury says?
I am glad we are coming into the Christmas period, because maybe Phil Goff can take a holiday, even if it will not be supported by—
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. You know that Ministers cannot start with that sort of gratuitous attack on a member who asks a question. Nor did that address the question. [ Interruption]
Mr SPEAKERA point of order was called. I accept the basis of the member’s point of order. The only issue, though, is that he may recollect that his previous supplementary question was fairly blatantly political. I seem to recollect his saying something about the Prime Minister’s failure. Then the supplementary question that the member asked just now was more of a statement than a supplementary question. Where members make political statements, there is a limit to how much I can control Ministers in terms of their answering them with political statements. However, I would ask the Prime Minister to come to the substance of the statement as quickly as possible, please.
Hon Trevor Mallard Link to this
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. How does he take responsibility for Treasury’s statement?
The member stopped just when the statement started, and I seem to remember that what followed was a fairly loaded statement. [ Interruption] There are plenty of Speakers’ rulings that indicate that there are devices that are used to try to turn a statement into a question. Some former Speakers did not allow them, but I do. But I would ask the Prime Minister to please come to the substance of the statement in his answer.
New Zealand’s economic position relative to Ireland, Greece, Spain, Portugal, the UK, the United States of America, most of the European Union, and all of the OECD is stronger than it was. So, no, I cannot take responsibility for the global financial crisis, but thank goodness we have a leadership team that is taking New Zealand out of these difficult conditions.
When looking at the blowout in the Government’s deficit of $2.5 billion over the last 6 months, how much of that deficit can be accounted for by tax cuts for the wealthy, which it is now shown that he is effectively borrowing in order to pay for?
Can the Prime Minister tell the House how successful gimmicks like a cycleway and the Job Summit have been in reducing the unemployment and welfare rolls and as a way of contributing to creating new jobs and cutting expenditure?
Very. Although I am prepared to accept that things are not going brilliantly for the New Zealand economy, all I can say is they are going better than they are for the Labour Party.
Why did he yesterday describe the tax take as being slightly down, when the reduction in corporate tax has been a massive 28 percent over the last 4 months from what was forecast; is that not a sign that this economy is failing?
No, not if one looks at the way that corporate taxes are paid. They are paid on a provisional basis. Everyone understands that when the bad times initially come, corporate tax is higher, and that over a period of time it takes a while to catch up. The member will remember that under the Labour Government, corporate taxes were much higher than had been anticipated.
Rahui KateneIs he aware that the Children’s Social Health Monitor released yesterday showed a dramatic rise in hospital admissions for Māori and Pasifika children for conditions with a social gradient over the last 2 years, and what actions will the Government take in a post-recession Budget to protect the most vulnerable children from such hardship?
I have not seen the document that the member is quoting from. What I can say is that the Government is trying to tackle those issues with a variety of different mechanisms, and in a variety of areas. Whānau Ora would be one good example of that, where we are trying to get in and support families at the grass roots in order to make a difference for those vulnerable children.
What consideration will he give to recommendations from the Māori Party, the Child Poverty Action Group, and the Alternative Welfare Working Group for the in-work tax credit to be extended to all low-income families as an immediate support for families on benefits?
I think that is very unlikely. The reason is that the fiscal cost of that would be significant. When the policy was introduced by the previous Labour Government, it was brought in because there was a recognition that we always wanted to make sure that working paid. The in-work tax credit recognises that, and National’s position at the time supported that.