Penk Chris; Parker DavidCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Thank you very much Mr Chair. I've been enjoying this discussion including Minister Parker's response on the subject of the way that the CPI—consumer price index—has been calculated and as that relates to the calculations and so on. I do have a question actually in relation to that but perhaps I can come to that after my initial contribution is made in relation to a different clause within the bill—obviously talking about Part 2.I'm interested in the Best Start tax credit at clause 14. We see that a figure is to be replaced: $3120" is to be replaced by "$3388" and no doubt that's appropriate—I actually haven't looked into that particularly. I'm not highlighting the quantum of the increase particularly but I am interested in the fact that that subsection applies for the 2022 to 2023 and later tax years. So what that tells us is that this legislation is going to be on the books for ever on the face of it and there is no end in sight to the traffic light system. We've already spoken about the fact that it's like a board game: you've got to roll a zero to start. You know we're going to start in red and go all the way to green and even then in green we're not back to life as normal. So the question is is there any light at the end of the tunnel in relation to the traffic light system?Barbara Kuriger: A train could be coming the other way.CHRIS PENK: And my colleague Barbara Kuriger suggests that the light at the end of the tunnel might indeed be a train coming the other way. But as far as the legislation is concerned this will go on forever and ever.Now the Minister might well say and I invite him to respond—indeed I'd like him to respond—along the lines that oh well eventually it will be repealed when it's no longer needed. But surely the smarter approach would be to say that the operation of the legislation is linked to the COVID-19 Protection Framework—namely the traffic light system—because that way we would have the support in place as long as it's needed not less and not more. And I say "not less" because I wouldn't suggest or advocate just to be clear that the support only be put in place let's say for the 2022-23 tax year or perhaps for that one and one more and try and make an educated guess about how long the global pandemic will last. We don't know that of course.But we do know that the support will be needed as long as the Government response is such that the support is needed. And it sounds quite circular but that's the whole point. The two should cross refer. There should be no reason that the legislation can't contemplate an end of this life as we know it—you know under the framework. That broader point that my colleague and friend the Hon Paul Goldsmith made was absolutely right: the elephant in the room is that the best way to avoid needing all this extra support is to allow businesses to simply get on and trade in the way that they would wish to to be able to get themselves out of the hole instead of giving them a shovel that they might continue to dig it still deeper.So my question to the Minister therefore is has he contemplated or would he contemplate perhaps by way of Supplementary Order Paper—it's not too late; after all the night is yet young. As we all know we'll be here potentially until midnight. So is there any reason that we can't have a formulation in there whereby the legislation applies for as long as the measures in the other bill which is about to become an Act apply? So that's my first question or set of questions.My other one is in relation to the Consumers Price Index often referred to broadly speaking as inflation. But my question to the Minister is along the lines of that asked by Andrew Bayly but it develops the theme a bit further because I would note particular businesses have particular cost pressures costs that rise in a way that is above the general rate of inflation—with or without the tobacco. So for example a business in my electorate that's involved in construction—a hugely important industry of course across New Zealand because of course you know we all need places to live and it goes without saying that there are housing supply issues that have plagued you know all the country for a number of years now.But the cost pressures in that industry particularly with regard to timber and other supply issues would affect a construction outfit in my electorate or any other in a way that's disproportionate to the general rate of inflation. So above even the 4.9 percent that we've experienced recently and goodness knows how much higher that will get notwithstanding or perhaps because of in any case—well regardless of the intervention of the Reserve Bank inflation might go higher. But for particular businesses that might be particularly affected by particular price movements will the Minister contemplate a more generous regime to match that? Or is his mind closed to the point more generally about inflation being the market?Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister of Revenue): The changes to entitlements to Working for Families and the family tax credit aren't intended to be linked to COVID. Although they are a benefit to people during COVID they are intended to endure."