4. Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
When he said the vast bulk of New Zealanders would not be worse off after this Budget, which New Zealanders did he expect would be worse off?
Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) Link to this
What I actually said was that I expected the vast bulk of New Zealanders to be better off under a tax system that increases GST to 15 percent, reduces personal income taxes across the board, and compensates people receiving income support. That is demonstrably the case.
Does he expect life to be better for the 60,000 New Zealanders his Government is budgeting to be still on the unemployment benefit in 4 years’ time, which is double the number of unemployed he inherited when National became the Government, and how will gradually creating only 10,000 jobs through this Budget help them?
I remind the member that less than a month ago unemployment in this country was reduced from 7.1 percent on an adjusted basis to 6 percent. The Budget indicates that the unemployment rate will continue to fall from that rate. I think this Government is doing a lot to create jobs. As the Budget quite clearly pointed out, supported by Treasury, this Budget will create more than 170,000 jobs.
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question asked whether he expected the 60,000 people who will be on the unemployment benefit in 4 years’ time to be better off. He did not address the question.
Mr SPEAKERI will allow the honourable member to repeat her question, without loss of her supplementary question.
Does he expect life to be better for the 60,000 New Zealanders his Government is budgeting to be still on the unemployment benefit in 4 years’ time, which is double the number of unemployed he inherited when National became the Government, and how will gradually creating only 10,000 jobs through this Budget help them?
Firstly, it is a hypothetical question, because no one knows who will be on the unemployment benefit. What I can say to those who are on the unemployment benefit and coming off that benefit, is that they are far better off under a National Government, because they will almost certainly face a tax rate of no more than 17.5 percent, which is half what they used to face under a Labour Government.
If he is correct that the vast bulk of New Zealanders will not be worse off, does this Budget include sufficient funding to reverse the cuts to home help for thousands of older New Zealanders who have paid taxes all their lives, and who now face daily risks to their health, unnecessary costs, and misery?
The answer is that this Budget provided more money for health than has ever been provided for it in New Zealand’s history—$14 billion. Those matters are operational and are being taken up by the district health boards.
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I did not talk about the health budget. I asked whether there was sufficient funding to reverse the cuts to services for thousands of older New Zealanders.
The member asked about sufficient funding in the Budget, and the answer referred to the amount of funding in the Budget for health. I think the Prime Minister in his answer, on this occasion, basically rejected part of the member’s question. I think he was rejecting the part of the question about cuts; that is his right in answering the question.
Does he believe this Budget will reduce the underclass in New Zealand—as he has previously described some New Zealanders, and which he said was to the shame of us all—in light of the fact that thousands of New Zealand children will get little or no benefit from this Budget and cannot even see the first rung of the opportunity ladder that he likes to talk about?
I think there are a number of things in the Budget that will help. One of those is the funding that goes into education to provide national standards to make sure that this is a Government that takes it seriously that young New Zealanders can read and write properly. The Budget will virtually halve the tax rate on low-income New Zealanders, it provides tax cuts for the bulk of New Zealanders, and in my view it puts the right incentives into the economy to help those who are least well-off to improve in life. As a short answer, yes.
Does he agree with the New Zealand Council of Christian Social Services, an organisation that works with the most vulnerable in society, and his own Minister of Finance, Bill English, that the gap between rich and poor in this Budget is about the same, and when will he match his rhetoric about an underclass with some action?