National will continue with the economic plan that’s working if voters back it:
A re-elected National Government will return to surplus this financial year and stay there so we can reduce debt, reduce ACC levies on households and businesses and start modestly reducing income taxes, Finance Spokesman Bill English says.
“National’s clear economic plan is working for New Zealand by successfully supporting higher wages and more jobs, and ensuring government spending is invested wisely to deliver better results,” he said when issuing National’s Finance Policy today.
“National is working hard to ensure the economy grows sustainably into the future, supported by more savings, productive investment and exports. This will provide opportunities for Kiwi families to get ahead here in New Zealand.”
As set out in the Budget, a National-led Government will restrict average Budget allowances for discretionary new spending and revenue measures to $1.5 billion a year over the next three years. Within this allowance National will:
• Allow around $1 billion a year for new spending, including between $600 million and $700 million a year more for health and education. This total new spending is consistent with the level of new spending in our last two Budgets and it’s well below the $2 billion to $3 billion spending increases under the last Labour government, which had little to show for them.
• Reserve the remaining $500 million per Budget for modest tax reductions and further debt repayment, as economic and fiscal conditions permit. This portion of the allowance will be moved between Budgets and accumulated as necessary. Therefore, by the third year there will be around $1.5 billion available for tax cuts and debt repayment.
“It means that over the next four years, National will spend around $10 billion more in total, and most of that on health and education,” Mr English says.
“This is well below the $18 billion in extra spending Labour has already earmarked for the next four years, and that’s not counting the Greens and Dotcom.”
National’s five fiscal priorities for the next three years are:
1. Return to surplus this year and maintain surpluses over subsequent years. These growing surpluses will enable us to meet the Government’s capital requirements and reduce debt.
2. Reduce net government debt to 20 per cent of GDP by 2020, including starting to repay net debt in dollar terms in 2017/18. Reducing government debt puts New Zealand in a better position to cope with the next economic shock or natural disaster.
3. Further reduce ACC levies on households and businesses, starting on 1 April 2016. A National Government will cut levies on all ACC accounts by an average of around 30 per cent. Subject to public consultation, this will reduce levies by between $700 million and $900 million a year – the equivalent of a tax cut for households and businesses.
4. Begin to reduce income taxes from 1 April 2017, providing economic and fiscal conditions allow, and if the first three priorities have been achieved. Any tax reductions will be modest, given the fiscal headroom available, and they will focus on low and middle income earners.
“We will consider the details of a possible tax package closer to the time,” Mr English says. “As the Prime Minister and I have said, we won’t be setting out a specific tax package before this election.”
5. Use any further fiscal headroom – including from positive revenue surprises – to get net debt to 20 per cent of GDP sooner than 2020.
“Once debt gets to 20 per cent of GDP, we will begin to resume contributions to the New Zealand Superannuation Fund,” Mr English says.
“In addition, we will help to keep interest rates lower for longer for New Zealand families by reducing core Crown spending to below 30 per cent of GDP by 2017/18 from 34.4 per cent in 2008/09 under the previous government. And our focus will remain relentlessly on targeting that spending where it delivers better results for New Zealanders.”
National will continue to improve management of the Government’s capital investment programme, which totals around $24 billion over the next four years.
“That includes using the remaining $1.7 billion of proceeds from the Government share offers to reinvest in new public assets like schools, hospitals and regional roads – without having to borrow this money.”
Mr English says New Zealanders have a stark choice this election.
“They can continue to support National and its clear economic plan that is working for New Zealand. It’s delivering a strong economy, it’s getting us back to surplus and it’s getting on top of debt. Under National, we will achieve sustained growth that delivers solid increases in household incomes and new jobs through the next term.
“Or they can put all that at risk by changing course to who knows what direction.
“Under Labour, the Greens and Dotcom, the economy would stall. They would introduce five new and unnecessary taxes and create a surge of wasteful government spending.
“And they would undermine the confidence necessary for businesses to invest now so we get stronger growth later.” . .
National has been criticised from the right for not offering bigger tax cuts and the left for offering the cuts at all.
The amount isn’t big but the contrast the plan provides with Labour and its potential coalition partners is significant.
National will allow low and middle income earners to keep a little more of their own money.
Labour and its partners would leave them with a lot less because of the five new taxes they’d impose on top of higher KiwiSaver contributions.
On top of that we’d be faced with higher interest rates, higher inflation and lower growth.
National’s plan is working.
It’s cushioned the most vulnerable from the worst effects of the recession and got the country back on track to surpluses and growth.
The policies Labour and its mis-matched mates would impose on the country would undo the good work and take us backwards again.
National’s ‘tax cuts’ – what a complete charade. Key and English are making chumps of New Zealanders. What a farce.
LikeLike
Politically naive with a complete dearth of commercial and economic nous, aint that a surprise.
Guyton fails to comprehend the gulf between a signal for economic future policy intent, and a half arsed CGT that will be enacted and left “to an expert body of advisers” to flesh out the fine print.
Yet another example of classic better to be silent and thought stupid than preach and remove any doubt Guyton.
Some New Zealanders require no assistance to be made into a chump, for you Guyton achieve it all the time, completely unaided.
LikeLike
“We might offer a pitiful tax cut in 2017, maybe, probably, if we are in the position, hopefully, mumble, um, er… Bill! Help me out here!”
Good grief! Swallow that, Gravedodger and your the King of the Chumps.
LikeLike
your/you’re – unsure? Ask John Key.
LikeLike
Gravedodger – your understanding of economic matters is tenuous to say the least. Consider this:
“New Zealand’s national debt was less after nine years of Labour than when they were elected. The Clarke government was fiscally ultra-conservative, because the books really did balance.
Contrast that with debt under Key’s government. Starting at around $18 billion, it has blossomed to a staggering $86 billion today. That’s a five-fold increase, in just six years.
Yes, we’ve had the global financial crisis and Canterbury earthquakes and tax cuts for the wealthy that have to be paid for somehow. We’ve also had record commodity prices, significant departmental cost-cutting, and the sell-off of major state-owned assets. Plus very little new spending.
Yet we’re running up debt at more than $13 billion per year – to merely tread water.
It doesn’t add up. These guys are supposedly the whizz-bang flash moneymen. So how come we’re so indebted it now costs over $4 billion per year just to service the interest?
Truth is, the economic recovery is itself a myth.
Take away the Christchurch rebuild and growth is nominally zero.”
LikeLike
Actually, Gravedodger, some folk choose ignorance.
Even when they have facts put under their noses,
Funny old world.
The truth is that you can’t grow – based on things physical, and every move of every Government of every hue is physical at its base – forever.
Which means the repeated Bill English statements are incorrect. Sure, they go largely unchallenged by a fairly ignorant mass, but that doesn’t make them true.
We turn the finite, physical planet into ‘money’ – then focus myopically on just the ‘money’. Consider Norway – past it’s peak supply of the energy you do real work with, but stacking up Euros instead. Which is of any use?
So arguing either way about money issues – like taxes – is akin to arguing about which colour of Titanic deckchair fades less in the sun.
Somewhat irrelevant.
What we need is real leadership, real maturity as a society, and the cohones to say ‘mea culpu, now lets fix it’.
Not even the greens go there, yet time is running out due to exponential growth. In the last 2 years, more concrete was poured in China, than in the USA in the last 100. How long do you think that continues? One of our problems – and it may well be the cause of our demise – is the inability to understand exponential numbers.
LikeLike
Except Murray you are basing your belief on your current and potentially outdated understanding as technology changes. That’s similar to those at the end of the 1800’s that said we couldn’t grow any more or else we’d be mired in horse shit.
LikeLike
One straight question Guyton, Have you ever embarked on a commercial venture that should it fail you lose everything and in fact may still owe a mortgage or loan balance after the wash up.
Having done so with absolutely no fallback on a skill or qualification for an alternative income stream and where bankruptcy is the only option.
Plenty of New Zealand citizens take such a risk every day and those who succeed will most likely end up as the funders of all your dreams personal, social and political.
LikeLike
Paranormal, What energy sources will be used to power this modern age where continual growth will supposedly be possible?
LikeLike
technology can only be applied to energy, in terms of efficiencies. I can’t create energy, you understand that, Para? I’m not sure you do; you seem to think fossil oil as a technology, whereas it is a finite store of crackable carbon bonds.
There were, what, 1.3 billion planetary inhabitants in 1880?
What relevance is that to now?
Denial is what your comment looks like.
LikeLike
Good on you MG, amongst your prejudices you crack out the denial word.
You are myopically looking at oil rather than understanding the bigger picture. Yes I’m well aware that energy cannot be created or destroyed. However oil is only stored sunshine energy. The Earth receives and releases massive amounts of energy every day.
You need to get over your obsession with oil and look wider. But I suppose that would deny you the pleasure you seem to gain from self flagellation.
LikeLike
Paranormal, ALL energy in the solar system comes from the sun, that’s not new information. Whenever I point out that, because of climate change, we must change to renewable energy, commenters here jeer about sail or solar powered tractors. So more detail from you on how this continually growing economy will be powered please.
LikeLike
“So more detail from you on how this continually growing economy will be powered please.”
Nuclear power.. advances in technology will mean there could be a plant in every neighbourhood.
Batteries with vastly greater efficiency in storing sunlight.
Resources we haven’t either developed yet or even thought about.
Fracking.. we’ve hundreds of years of supply.
Improvements in clean coal that we haven’t developed yet.
Cheap mini dams in some places. Last week, for two days work and $7000 I got a 13 x 2 metre high water control complete with huge rocks, iron staunches and cable threaded through it and anchored to dead men each side of a stream bed. If I had wanted, I could have had it boxed and concreted for probably another $7000.
JC
LikeLike
Technology is advancing at such a rate that we would likely be wrong to predict what will be the next century’s mode of power. The thing really holding us back is power storage. However there is massive advancement happening in that area.
You and Murray are sadly wrong with your climate change delusions. More evidence is comes out daily that there has been no warming and we are in a benign part of the 30 year hurricane cycle.
We have oil for some time yet during which time technology continues to develop and improve.
LikeLike
So Paranormal, a faith based answer that someone in the future will invent something, (which was also one of JC’s options). JC, improving batteries and microhydro would be useful, but neighbourhood nuclear, ‘clean coal’ and hundreds of years of fracking are pure fantasy.
LikeLike
” More evidence is comes out daily”
Yes. But the place it issues from is not regarded as a reliable source of truth.
LikeLike