Doocey MattMATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): Thank you very much Mr Speaker. It's a pleasure to take a call in this debate and it will be a smaller call because I realise there are some of my colleagues that are waiting to take a call before this debate finishes in about 15 minutes' time. I want to start by saying I'm a bit disappointed the financial oracle Dr Duncan Webb was not taking a call in this debate because—unfortunately I think for this Government—Dr Duncan Webb decided that he would make a submission to the Christchurch City Council for their rate increases where he slammed them for not increasing rates high enough. He actually said it would cost jobs and incomes for hard-working families. What's causing the lack of jobs and incomes in Christchurch is the delay for this Government on the Metro Sports Facility the delay for the convention centre the delay for the multi-use sports facility the delay for the Northern Corridor. Why that's important for this debate is because for all the money that they've so-called appropriated in Christchurch for their start-up investor fund—whatever that was called—not one dollar has been spent.So Dr Duncan Webb—what was really priceless was that in his submission he tried to say I'm not a Government member I'm here as a Christchurch-centric MP." were his words. Well didn't he learn? Well he will once one Hon Grant Robertson sits down beside him over the next few days in the Chamber and reminds him that when he speaks he is always speaking on behalf of the Government. What a shambles.You can have a person turn up and say that increasing rates on hard-working families will cost jobs and incomes because what a Labour Government fails to see—it's not about just spending money because let's remind ourselves in the last year of the former Labour Government the Salvation Army report said out of all their increased expenditure under the Helen Clark Government they did not increase social progress by 1 percent. All their increased expenditure and they did not increase social progress by 1 percent. What's the point of a Labour Government if you're not increasing social progress? They spent all their money and they got nothing in return. And here we are again: Groundhog Day; appropriations. If it wasn't for a sector this would be comical but in fact it's desperate. What we're talking about here is appropriations for health and mental health.Dr Nick Smith talked about metrics. Well the front-line new mental health service: $455 are allocated; they've spent $30 million of that. Not only that but in 18 months' time do you know what their target is? They would have rolled it out to less than three percent of GP practices—less than three percent of GP practices. So here they are: like the Salvation Army said they talk a big game they throw a lot of money around but they didn't increase social progress by 1 percent. Under written questions Dr David Clark told me for their service they announced last year: $8 million that was going to provide support for people with mental distress pitching up to emergency departments. How much of that $8 million has been spent to date? Zero. In their first year they haven't even got one dollar out of the gate. So here we are. Yeah you can write all the big figures you want to in appropriations but an area a much-needed area like mental health where the current Government talked up a big game in Opposition—we had the Mental Health Commissioner come out in his report this week and do you know what he said? From 2008 to 2018 mostly years under the former National Government access increased by 55 percent.Hon Tracey Martin: Rubbish—absolute rubbish.MATT DOOCEY: Well it's in the report. You go and read the Mental Health Commissioner report that was released this week: access was increased by 55 percent for $300 million. This Government has said they're going to spend $1.9 billion on mental health and asked the health Minister how much he's increased access by. Their own mental health inquiry said they needed to increase access from 7 percent of the population to 20 percent.Hamish Walker: How much did they spend?MATT DOOCEY: Well they don't know. They can't tell us. In answer to their question they say they don't know. They've thrown well allegedly $1.9 billion and they've got no target they've got no metric. No wonder the Salvation Army said in the last time they were in Government: for all the increased expenditure they didn't increase social progress by 1 percent.Here we are again: big appropriations talking big figures no targeted spending no targets—because of course they scrapped all the targets in the health sector—no targets to be measured by. Then when you drill down individually as a spokesperson for some of the projects that vulnerable New Zealanders need the most today in the first year they haven't spent any of the allocation.What is wrong with this Government? What is the point of a Labour Government if they're not driving social progress? Here we are again. Sounded pretty good at the time didn't it? "One point nine billion for mental health." And now they're getting caught out; they're not delivering. You know what? It was the DHB representatives and the annual reviews that were like the canaries in the cages because they were telling the Health Committee they didn't know if that money had flowed out yet. They couldn't point to where that money had gone. So you can talk up a big game you can write documents you can talk about billions of dollars. But in the end you will be judged on delivery and we all know—and the public is learning—that this Government does not deliver."