Taxation (Canterbury Earthquake Measures) Bill

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am just in the middle of a—just give me one second. I just have to find a third reading speech.

💬 Hon Rick Barker: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy): Are you speaking to the point of order?

💬 Hon Rick Barker: I am just saying I will give the member an extension of time—ha, ha!

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy): No. That is not a point of order.

💬 Hon Tony Ryall: Mr Speaker—

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy): Is this a point of order or a call?

💬 Hon Tony Ryall: It is a call.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy): Oh, a call.

on behalf of the Minister of Revenue: I am pleased to be able to move the third reading of this bill.

💬 Hon Ruth Dyson: The Taxation (Canterbury Earthquake Measures) Bill.

That is right; it is the Taxation (Canterbury Earthquake Measures) Bill. As we spoke about in the Committee stage, a number of issues were raised in the bill, and I think the very strong support this bill has enjoyed from across the House was quite clear. In the Committee stage of the Taxation (Canterbury Earthquake Measures) Bill, I was able to provide quite detailed answers to the questions from the members opposite. There was some considerable debate particularly in relation to trading stock issues, which always cause quite a lot of consideration and discussion. I commend the progress and the finalisation of the bill to the House.

💬 Hon Rick Barker: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

💬 Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I will just rule on something first. The member must move a motion first. This is the third reading, so if the member would like to do that—

Yes, Mr Speaker. I did seek to do that at the beginning—

💬 Hon Rick Barker: I move that the Taxation (Canterbury Earthquake Measures) Bill be now read a third time.

I move, That the Taxation (Canterbury Earthquake Measures) Bill be now read a third time.

💬 Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes; that is what it should be.

Firstly, I congratulate the Minister of Health on his high degree of management and organisation in respect of the Taxation (Canterbury Earthquake Measures) Bill. It exemplifies and sets a high bar in terms of how to manage legislation through the House. Many precedents have been created in the last 2 or 3 minutes, and I thank the senior Opposition whip for assisting to move the motion. We would not want to see this bill delayed, or implode on itself, through a bungled legislative process. Putting that aside, we did right in supporting the clean slate legislation, and I think we should probably adhere to that principle, as well.

With regard to the Opposition, I think there is unanimity on all sides of the House, in all parties, that this bill will be supported. I will not waylay it much longer. Suffice to say, this is good legislation. It will provide some comfort and assistance to a large number of people, and entities, in Canterbury who in many cases are going through a living hell in respect of their businesses, and in respect of their livelihoods. This legislation will take one small bit of stress out of a number of people’s lives.

It should also be noted that through the earthquakes, as I think all members have alluded to, the generosity of spirit exhibited by people, businesses, and entities has been well beyond anybody’s expectation. Those of us who are Canterbury members of Parliament—I am sure this is shared on the other side of the House—have found out through these disasters, firstly, just how generous people can be, and secondly, the ability of community leaders, councillors, and others to make calls and simply ask for things. It is amazing what people will do, and it is amazing what people do in terms of dipping into their own pockets and providing goods, services, and comforts.

It is also noteworthy that a large number of employers treated their staff very, very well, and went beyond the minimal requirements. I think those who did that had the ethos that staff are the most important asset that organisations have. If they are looked after, organisations will perform, and perform well.

Again, it is with a great deal of pleasure that I commend the Minister of Health, whom, I suspect, was dropped in it at the last moment to shepherd this legislation through its last stage in the House. He has shown amazing legislative and parliamentary flexibility and dexterity to make sure this bill goes through in a timely fashion and does not hit any roadblocks on the way. I give our thanks to the officials, as well.

I rise to support the Taxation (Canterbury Earthquake Measures) Bill at its third reading. Rebuilding Canterbury is one of the Government’s top priorities. We have seen that in the Budget this week, and we are doing everything that is needed to support and build Canterbury over the coming weeks, months, and years. The Government and all New Zealanders stand behind Canterbury in this difficult time and together we will get Christchurch and Canterbury back on its feet.

This bill is one of a number of actions the Government is taking to support Cantabrians and to help rebuild Christchurch. It provides real and practical help through the tax system to the people of Canterbury. Much has been said and written about the 22 February earthquake, and this bill represents concrete action to provide help that is both useful and practical. We have heard from members across the House of the number of generous donors that we have had in our city, both local people and international people. We have heard of them donating to neighbourhoods and employees; we have heard about fantastic opportunities from everywhere. So this is an opportunity to make sure that their generous donations do not carry any tax liabilities.

The bill focuses on the tax treatment for a range of situations where people could have been negatively affected by tax law, because the current tax law, of course, has never been designed to cope with disasters of this scale. As has been noted, this is the first time that we have had a national civil defence disaster. I think right across the House everybody has been supporting this bill. We see that it is needed. We see that it is practical and common sense. I commend the bill to the House.

As I said earlier, this debate is a very good note to end the parliamentary week on, particularly after the very tense debate on the National - ACT - Māori Party provisions to hack away at our KiwiSaver, which many people around the House and around the country are very distressed about. Being able to conclude the week on a unanimous vote of support for Canterbury is very good.

I remind the Government members that the Taxation (Canterbury Earthquake Measures) Bill is not the end of the work that needs to be done in Canterbury. I hope they take some note of the concerns that have been raised about the plight of early childhood education centres. A large number of people are still living in homes that, as a result of damage from the earthquake, do not have a source of heating, and it is cold in our city in the winter. I would really like everyone to have at least one source of heating in their home. We want speedy resolution of our land issues. We have land that people are not certain they will ever be able to rebuild on. We have the danger of rockfall. People are not sure whether they will be able to move back to their homes because of the danger of rockfall. Those are the practical and big issues that are facing our residents at the moment. I do not want the Government to relax after we pass this bill tonight but to understand that we have not by any means finished the job.

This bill is a good measure. It recognises the generosity of individuals and organisations that donated various items either to their employees or to other people affected by the earthquake. That generosity should be matched by the Government taking away some tax liability. That is what the Government is doing tonight. It is a very good move. Pushing out to October the tax credits for people who have been made redundant as a result of the business situation following the earthquakes is good, but it is not enough. We should have used the opportunity tonight to get rid of that scheme altogether, because it is basically unfair. I am saddened that the Minister of Health did not take the brief moment of power he had while acting for the Minister of Revenue to accept the amendment I proposed, which would have extended the scheme to events covered by the 26 December earthquake, because that was a significant event. Omitting it makes the legislation look a bit cheap and it need not; it could be a complete package. But that is the decision of the Government.

I have enjoyed the contributions from members around the House tonight. It is good to know that even though the people of Canterbury are off the TV screens and out of the newspapers, we are not out of people’s minds altogether. I have only one lasting regret, and that is that despite what has clearly been a lot of work from the officials—they have put a lot of work into this legislation—they did not have to do a lot of work at the select committee, because the Government bypassed that opportunity for them. They clearly gave the Minister in the chair very good advice, and he reported it back to the House well, to his credit, in response to the questions that we raised, and I appreciated that. Some Ministers do not bother doing that for their own portfolios, so for an acting Minister to do that was very good. But it is to my deep regret that they were not able to provide him with a third reading speech in time for him to give it.

In speaking to the third reading of the Taxation (Canterbury Earthquake Measures) Bill, I say it is good to see that this measure has been well considered and well canvassed. It is a sensible, pragmatic, compassionate, and fair attempt to use the Income Tax Act 2007 to consider the full circumstances that have happened in Canterbury and in Christchurch. When we look at the legislation in general, we see it is an anti - tax avoidance measure. Therefore, it is fair and reasonable that it provides the relief that Christchurch so admirably deserves.

We look forward to Christchurch’s return to its former glory. The dislocation is on a phenomenal scale, and we look forward to a speedy recovery, although we do recognise that that will take some time and that there is a lot of pain and suffering down there. I commend the bill to the House.

Bill read a third time.

The House adjourned at 8.22 p.m. (Friday)