Goods and Services Tax (Exemption of Healthy Food)

Goods and Services Tax (Exemption of Healthy Food) Amendment Bill
First Reading, Wednesday 8th September 2010; 8pm
Te Ururoa Flavell, MP for Waiariki

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. Kia ora tātou katoa. Unfortunately my colleague had to get back to her home and her whānau tonight, so I wish to convey and add to the comments that my colleague Rahui Katene gave to the House in opening up the debate on the Goods and Services Tax (Exemption of Healthy Food) Amendment Bill.

I want to say from the very start that there are no politics in this particular bill. This bill was on the agenda at the last election in terms of our platform as a Māori Party. It was ahead of any discussion in respect of what the National Party might do with GST. At the heart of it, it is motivated by the fact that my colleague, Rahui, set out at the very start with a real desire to help out those who are struggling in respect of paying the bills and looking after their whānau and families.

Along the back of that, by taking off GST from healthy foods in particular, and that is deliberate, then we might enable not only tamariki and whānau to have good food but also in the end it would contribute to the longer discussion on the health of New Zealand across the board. Sure, in our view it is aimed towards Māori, but that is in the belief that what is good for Māori is good for everyone.

I congratulate Rahui for taking this on for us as a party, and I cannot help but refer to the bailing out of South Canterbury Finance*, which we debated in the House today. The amount paid out for the investors of South Canterbury Finance, according to our figures at least, is equal to $405 for every man, woman, and child in Aotearoa—$405.

What we are talking about with this GST bill is equivalent to a mere $38 for every man, woman, and child in Aotearoa. It hardly bears comparison. Removing GST off food is a key Māori Party platform, as I said, and there are many reasons for that. The health impact is immediate, and, frankly, we are not winning the battle of the bulge by a long shot. New Zealand’s obesity ranking is third out of the 31 OECD countries. We trail behind only the United States and Mexico. At its most serious, there are 8,000 preventable deaths a year related to poor nutrition and obesity, and a rising cost of $1.3 billion in the next for years for type 2 diabetes alone.

One of the most ironic factors setting the scene for this bill is that it can cost a lot to be healthy. Just look at the supermarket trolleys these days. The fruit and veges are rapidly allocated to too-costly basket, while the unhealthy items such as noodles, a bottle of Coke, or a packet of biscuits are far cheaper to stock up on.

I want to remind us of the reality of poverty and say to the House that it is easy enough to rattle out the statistics. There are 27 percent of Māori children who live in poverty, and 150,000 children are categorised as being in severe or significant hardship. The estimated cost of child poverty is about $2.8 billion, but the greater question is how can any nation afford not to eliminate poverty and not do all it can to invest in the health and wellbeing of its people?

We are really proud of this bill and its challenge to the Government to exempt health foods from the goods and services tax. We believe that a responsible Government would encourage the purchase of healthy food and would make it possible for all people to benefit from fresh fruit and veges, to enjoy the luxury of lean meat, poultry, and seafood, and to have a bottle of milk in the fridge. It does not have to be difficult.

It is hard to understand why a Government that is so committed to trans-Tasman relations would be so reluctant to learn from Australia’s experience and the computerised model the Australian Taxation Office* has developed to make it easy to take the tax off. The Australian tax experience has streamlined the process to make it simple for small businesses.

To sum up, for the minimal cost of $38 per person we can save billions in the health spend. We can do it tomorrow without too much difficulty. In doing so, we would be investing in the long-term health of the nation. I want to end with a simple question that was posed by Gordon Campbell* in his article Everywhere else, countries recognise the need to exempt food from GST. He asked: “The question then is not why do it—but why not do something so easy, so readily manageable by business, so justifiable on grounds of social justice, and so likely to deliver practical health benefits to the community?” That is the question. If this bill does not make it through tonight, we will be raising this again as an ongoing issue to support those who are struggling.

ENDS