1. Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
Does he stand by all his statements as Prime Minister; if so, why?
Hon JOHN KEYDoes he stand by his statement to Tūhoe negotiators that handing over ownership of the Ureweras to the tribe was “complex but workable”, which the negotiators are adamant he said to them in his office in March?
Mr SPEAKERWas the hand-over of ownership of the Ureweras the preferred option for settling the Treaty negotiations that was passed by the Cabinet Treaty negotiations committee that he himself chaired; if not, what was the preferred option?
The honourable Leader of the Opposition should not say that, but the interjections were a little unnecessary.
When did Tariana Turia indicate to him that she was, in his words, “totally fine” about his decision on the Tūhoe negotiations?
When I had a discussion with Tariana Turia on the Sunday night and gave her the decision that we had taken in relation to Tūhoe, she was respectful in the conversation we had. She made it absolutely clear that she was not happy with the decision, but, unlike the case with the Leader of the Opposition, when one has a conversation with Tariana Turia one does not think that a cardiac arrest is about to follow.
Does he stand by his statement last month on Radio New Zealand National that “The 20 free hours early education policy won’t be changed.”, and his earlier pledge that National would enhance 20 hours early childhood education and keep existing subsidies?
Hon Jim AndertonThe member will resume his seat. I say to Government backbenchers on this occasion that the Hon Jim Anderton had hardly uttered a word, and interjections were unreasonable at that point.
Does the Prime Minister recall saying in a radio interview yesterday that he did not agree with the proposal from the Cabinet Treaty negotiations committee, which he chairs, to gift the Urewera National Park to the Tūhoe iwi; if so, did he approve the item going on the Cabinet agenda, and then, without any further consultation with Treaty committee members, remove it from the Cabinet agenda and unilaterally decide to cancel that recommendation, again without consultation; if so, how would he describe that process for balanced and informed Cabinet decision-making?
In answer to those four questions: yes, no, no, and no. If the member is to do better in seeking the Christchurch mayoralty, he will have to explain things a bit more simply to the people of Christchurch.
I call Metiria Turei. [ Interruption] I apologise to the honourable member. I say to both sides of the House that I understand that the issue will arouse passion, and I am not troubled by that, but I ask for a little respect to the member whom I have called.
Metiria TureiDoes the Prime Minister stand by his statement reported today that New Zealanders should not be envious that his tax cuts will deliver much more to the rich than to those who are struggling, and does he not think it is grossly insulting to make an accusation that people who care about a fair society and reducing inequalities are guilty of envy?
Absolutely I stand by that statement. I point out a reasonably simple but interesting fact that I think is worthy of being mentioned in this debate: the top 10 percent of income earners pay 44 percent of all personal income tax in New Zealand. Interestingly enough, if Working for Families and other benefits, etc., are taken into account, the 10 percent of taxpayers in New Zealand who are the top earners actually pay 76 percent of all net personal tax.
Does the Prime Minister understand that the top 10 percent of income earners pay only 4 percent of their income in GST, whereas the lowest 10 percent pay 14 percent of their income in GST, making the increase in GST hit the poorest people the hardest; if so, why does he not look at implementing the measures released yesterday by the Green Party in the Mind the Gap package; they are directly focused on reducing inequality, which is New Zealand’s most significant social and economic problem?
I am not sure that I can agree with the numbers that the member put forward, but I can simply say that the advice from Treasury is that the progressivity nature of GST is about the same as that of the personal tax system. In other words, those who earn more pay more. The simple facts of life are that those who earn more income consume a lot more, and therefore nominally pay more GST.
In light of broken promises to Tūhoe and to the public on things like GST, does he stand by this statement of his: “One sure way of only being a one-term Government is by breaking your word, and I have no intention of breaking my word.”?
Actually, I like those words. They sounded better out of my mouth than out of the Leader of the Opposition’s, but they are absolutely right. In relation to the question that he asked me, let me quote a question from Sean Plunket of Radio New Zealand National to Tāmati Kruger: “Had the Prime Minister said anything or had his office indicated anything to you that you had got through that process?”. The answer from Tāmati Kruger was “No.” You see, on this side of the House we know our positions; after 30 minutes of the Leader of the Opposition being on Q+A, I did not have a clue what his position was on anything.