Carter DavidRt Hon DAVID CARTER (National): I hadn't realised until that contribution from the Minister of Finance that we had a particular clause in here about making sure that somebody capable and interested in these things can continue with the work after he or she reaches 70 years of age. I now just wonder whether this is the reason why this legislation's before the House. The Rt Hon Winston Peters has argued for many years on changes to the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Act every election campaign and I suspect this time he's argued for it again so of course that's why it's before the House. The de facto Prime Minister's got his wish and we're now amending the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Act and maybe it's because he needs a job at the end of 2020—he needs a job. Maybe that's the reason for the legislation. So I just want the Minister in the chair to rise to his feet shortly and assure us that that's not the reason for the particular amendment that he's just alerted the committee to.My second question relates to clause 23 of replaced schedule 2 set out in schedule 3 Treasury observer". I want the Minister to answer a question here because we raised this issue at the Finance and Expenditure Committee with some concern but as Opposition members we're in a minority at that select committee and the chairman does a very good job as a lackey of the Labour Government so our amendments go absolutely nowhere and the bill gets returned effectively unchanged despite very valuable constructive comments from Opposition members. At clause 23 we as Opposition members were worried about the wording "(1) The Secretary to the Treasury must ensure that the Secretary a Deputy Secretary to the Treasury or any other Treasury officer or employee is nominated to be a Treasury observer." We felt this after Treasury's argued for so long to have the opportunity to be more involved in the Reserve Bank decisions—we argued that to put the words "any … employee" was actually downgrading this position. We suggest it should be the secretary or it should be a deputy secretary and we argued therefore for the words "any … employee" to come out because I don't want a new fresh-faced graduate from Victoria University coming in with a minor economics degree and then suddenly finding because he's a favourite of the secretary or the deputy secretary that he or she's in this position. So I want the Minister to assure us that after Treasury having argued so long—29 years in fact—to get more influence over the Reserve Bank the appointment of the Treasury observer will indeed be somebody senior. I want an assurance from the Minister of that and I think we should actually be moving an amendment and making sure that the words do change so it should either be the secretary or one of the deputy secretaries. This is an important position. Treasury has argued for it for years and it should not be some junior fresh graduate who gets into this position of being the Treasury observer. So I'd really appreciate an answer to that. While I'm on my feet I do point out I did ask another question earlier of the Minister which he didn't answer and it's probably because he can't answer it. I want to know what maximum sustainable employment is.Hon Grant Robertson: I did answer it.Rt Hon DAVID CARTER: Well he said he did answer it but I don't think anybody on this side understood it and I'd be very grateful if—Hon Tracey Martin: It's not our fault.Rt Hon DAVID CARTER: "Well it's not our fault."—the shrill from the Hon Tracey Martin comes across. If it's explained in plain English so that we could understand it—and I do bear in mind we're in good company here because Adrian Orr the current Governor of the Reserve Bank couldn't understand what maximum sustainable employment is either. So if Grant Robertson could elucidate that we'd be very grateful even though I do acknowledge it's Part 1 and not Part 2."