4. Question No. 4—FinanceNICOLA WILLIS (Deputy Leader—National) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 4—Finance4. NICOLA WILLIS (Deputy Leader—National) to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement in relation to the decision not to progress his tax proposal for Budget 2023 that I wouldn't have put so much work into it if I didn't think that it had merit. But I also am a team player"; if so approximately how many hours of officials' time went into developing these tax proposals that were rejected?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): I stand by my full statement which also said "I'm also somebody who's very conscious of the economic conditions that we're in". As I'm sure the member knows officials do sometimes undertake work on policies that aren't ultimately enacted. I think back here to the work officials did for the Rt Hon Bill English and the Hon Michael Woodhouse on stamp duty before it was rejected by the then Prime Minister John Key. In answer to the second part of the question I am also advised that relevant agencies don't hold that information and policy officials don't record their time in that manner. It is my view that the level of additional resources that would be required to assess that now would be a waste of taxpayer funding.Nicola Willis: Why did the Minister direct Government officials to invest hundreds of hours developing a wealth tax despite numerous commitments made in the 2020 election campaign including the statement by Grant Robertson MP that "I can reaffirm we won't be implementing the wealth tax. We have our own tax policy and we have been very clear that we won't be doing the wealth tax."?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As we've covered in this House on numerous occasions in virtually every Budget process that we know about there has been work done on taxation and tax policy for example the seven months of work that went into looking at a stamp duty proposed by Bill English and Michael Woodhouse before it was rejected by John Key.Nicola Willis: When on 16 February 2023—this year—when he directed officials to "focus on designing a net wealth tax for Budget 2023" did he do that with or without the blessing of the Prime Minister?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As the Prime Minister has already indicated that work was under way when he took over; he was happy to see that work go to its conclusion. The decision was then made not to go ahead with it.Nicola Willis: Why on 16 February did he direct officials to stop work on the minimum tax proposal that had been advanced under Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and instead tell them to develop a net wealth tax proposal and why did this coincide with the election of a new Prime Minister?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The member's active conspiracy theory brain just needs to be held in check a little bit. If the member does read through the documents she will see that the work was evolving. We were looking at a tax switch because on this side of the House if we're even thinking about tax changes we're thinking about how to fund them unlike the member who is proposing unfunded tax cuts.Nicola Willis: Does he think it's tenable to remain in his role as the Minister of Finance when a proposal he has put so much work into and continues to think has merit has been so comprehensively rejected by the Prime Minister?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I know the member will be aware that in politics from time to time we put a lot of work into something and it doesn't quite come off similar to the member's work on her leadership ambitions. Hon Damien O'Connor: What work if any did the Minister do on GST? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: We during this period of time did not look at increasing GST. We certainly did not look at increasing it—after having promised to not do that—before an election as the National Party did.Nicola Willis: Can he offer the House any insight as to why it's tenable for him to remain finance Minister—despite disagreeing with the Prime Minister on this major tax issue—but it's untenable for the Minister of Revenue to remain in his role despite similar disagreement; does it come down to one's a man of principle and one isn't?SPEAKER: Have you got any more supplementaries? That one's ruled out of order. If you ask a question like that then I'm going to leave it to the Minister whether to answer it or not. Clearly he didn't want to. I've ruled it out.Nicola Willis: Can he offer the House any insight into why it is tenable for him to remain finance Minister—despite disagreeing with the Prime Minister on this major tax issue—but it's untenable for the Minister of Revenue to remain in his role despite the same disagreement?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: In the course of every Government there will be decisions made where some Ministers propose ideas and those ideas do not get through. The reason that I find myself wanting to continue to be the Minister of Finance is because I know what is at risk from a change of Government and that is New Zealanders' ability to get good housing that is our education system that is our health system. So I am very pleased to still be here and I look forward to being here after 14 October as well."