Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. I rise to take a call in opposition to the Appropriation (2023/24 Estimates) Bill. This is the bill that Parliament passes in order for Parliament to spend billions and billions and billions of dollars of taxpayers' money. We've had people say it's a great tradition and there should be parties. To some extent that's true. It is a great thing that we have no taxation without representation. It is a good thing that the Government—the Prime Minister and his Ministers and their Government departments—cannot spend money without it being debated transparently in this House and examined by select committees so that people know at least where their taxes are going. That's a wonderful process and a tradition of parliamentary democracy we should hold dear.One of the problems though is that when we see what this Government is doing with our money we almost wish that we didn't know. You actually think ignorance could nearly be bliss because we have a Government that in round terms has increased Government expenditure from $87 billion to $137 billion in just five years. It's increased the amount that it spends every year by 70 percent. That money I know has partly been required because of inflation—that much is true—and it's also spread amongst more people. It's surprising how fast the New Zealand population rises—we're not actually the team of 5 million; we're over 5.2 million now. So to some extent the extra spending is needed because there are more people and this Government's management of the economy has led to so much inflation.On the other hand once you strip away the growth in the population and the amount of inflation people have seen with the cost rising in everything they buy well then you find the amount of money that's spent per person after inflation has risen 29 percent. The number of people employed in the core Public Service has gone up from 47000 up to 62000—almost exactly 29 percent as well. The question might be: what have we got at the end of the day? What are we getting for all of this extra taxpayer money being spent by the Government through this process?You see Mr Speaker that's where things get a bit tough. I've challenged in this House over this year many times Grant Robertson the Minister of Finance; and Chris Hipkins the Prime Minister to explain how they are guessing better outcomes—better outcomes—not spending more money but actually: what is better at the end of the day for all of this extra money? A $50 billion 70 percent increase in spending that means we're spending 29 percent more money per person after inflation after population growth—29 percent more money on each person. What are they getting that they weren't getting five years ago for 29 percent extra?It's worse than that because while taxes have risen a lot of that extra spending over the last five years has been paid for by borrowing. You see this Government in six Budgets has increased debt by $121 billion. It's hard to put that in any kind of perspective. What is $121 billion? Well if you say there's 5 million of us then it's $24000 of borrowing per person over six Budgets. That's $4000 a year of Government borrowing for every person in this Chamber—in fact every person in this country. For a family of four the Government's been borrowing 16 grand a year on their behalf—but they'll have to pay in taxes one day—in order to try and get the same results.And where are those results? Where is it that this Government is now doing better for its people for the money that's gone in? Well it's not in education. In broad terms over the last 10 years we've gone from about 70 percent of kids regularly attending to about 60 percent—a disaster. We have gone from around 5 percent who are chronically absent to around 8 percent. There are fewer kids going to school even though the Government are spending 38 percent more on education. What do the kids get when they go there? Well they're learning less; they're tumbling down the international league tables in reading in maths and in science. Kiwi kids know less and can do less than their older brothers and sisters and uncles and aunts who are 20 years older. In fact they've got about half a year less learning than kids of the same age 20 years ago. This is a disaster.What about transport? Do we have more roads with fewer potholes that get us where we would like to go faster and safer? Actually the road toll has flatlined the speed limits have come down anyway and the potholes are damaging people's cars up and down this country nearly every day. This is again a disaster.What about law and order? Are we getting better value for money or safer streets? Is it safer to run a dairy? Is it safer to run a jewellery store? Is it safe to run anything in this country? No. Victimisation according to the Ministry of Justice's own surveys has got worse.But then there's healthcare. What about healthcare? Do we have more doctors and nurses? Are people getting more drugs are they finding it easier to get into their GP and are the waiting lists getting shorter? No they're not.So in every area this Government is spending more money—even after inflation; even after population growth—and they're getting worse results. That takes a special kind of incompetence.Why has this happened and what will the next Government in just—what is it now?—52 days do about it? Well first of all we need to get back to giving the chief executives of Government departments clear objectives and then say If you do well you get paid more." You see Mr Speaker in every private business on the NZX the chief executive gets paid more if the company performs. In New Zealand's Government we have people who are responsible for multibillion dollar organisations—the Ministry of Social Development the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Education—and they get no reward for doing better and no penalty if their agency lets New Zealanders down. They're not even trying to measure what they're trying to achieve. No wonder we're spending more money and getting worse results.So one of the things the next Government has to do is follow the Australians' reporting on Government services' objectives and start giving the chief executives of the departments clear writing instructions on what we need to achieve. If they do well they do well and if they don't do well they might lose their job or some of their salary—that's how the real world works and it's how Government departments need to work.For example the Ministry of Social Development should be measured on how many people get off the dole and into work and how long they stay in work. We're not even trying to do that right now. We're just throwing money at every problem and still the results get worse.Just this weekend the ACT Party released a policy to show how we can make sure that New Zealand is better off and better served by its Government departments by actually telling them what we want and demanding they achieve it and rewarding them when they do. Then we start cutting Government waste. We cut the Government departments that can't produce any good outcomes. We cut the enormous bureaucracy that's grown by 15000 people—from 47000 to 62000—and achieves nothing. ACT's alternative budget shows how we could reduce expenditure by over $8 billion a year and nobody would notice. People say "Oh that'll be the end of the world." Just remember: this Government has increased expenditure by $50 billion a year. We want to take it back $8 billion. You're still $42 billion up in five years. The difference is we want to get some more results.What can you do if you reduce expenditure by $8 billion a year? Well you can give tax cuts. You can actually start paying back debt faster. ACT's alternative budget will not only demand better results from Government departments it will also cut people's taxes. So someone on the average wage—$78000 a year full-time—would get to keep $2200 more of their own money each and every year to fight the crippling price rises that New Zealanders up and down this country are facing.That is the kind of fiscal management that this country needs so that people feel their efforts in life make a difference—that if they work hard save and invest life will actually get better rather than having their money and their effort poured into the gaping maw of this Labour Government; this Labour Government that wants to give kids mandatory lessons in financial literacy. Well here's another idea: I think the children of New Zealand could give financial literacy lessons to Labour and we'd all be much better off. Thank you Mr Speaker."