Woods MeganHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Housing): It's my pleasure to take a call in this debate on the Appropriation (2022/23 Supplementary Estimates) Bill and Imprest Supply (First for 2023/24) Bill. I think it's important that we go back to that description that the Minister of Finance laid out in his first speech: exactly what this debate is about what it does. It's a very technical debate. I would draw members' attention to the fact that this isn't the Estimates debate. This is a very technical debate that does specific things. What it does is it looks at the wash-up that needs to be done. Now the need for these—if you'd only listened to the previous speaker Nicola Willis' speech you'd think this was some kind of anomaly where we're here in the House debating this bill and that somehow this was a fix-up because Government hadn't done things correctly. In fact these go back to 1989 and are a standard practice of the way in which Governments operate in terms of the need between the expenditure that occurs between the setting of the Budget and the passing of the bill that brings that into law and also the things that change over the period of time.So I'd just like to take on some of the matters that the previous speaker raised. So she said that already we're back here in this House and we're having to correct mistakes and she used the example of tertiary education. It's actually good to have an opportunity to actually talk about why it is that sometimes appropriations change. As some members of this House who have been involved in this will know the Budget-setting processes happen late in the year prior to the Budget being read. In this case if we're talking about Vote Tertiary Education one of the critical inputs into decision making around that is the enrolment forecast that our universities come forward with. Universities every year—and people who have had dealings with the sector and who have talked to universities in their own patches will know this. They will know that sometimes universities track very closely to what those enrolments are looking like. They have to make a forecast and when they come to say what the student achievement component of funding will be when they're speaking with their Minister around what that is the Minister needs to rely on those forecasts. Actually the bill that we have in front of us here actually tells the tale of two parts of this. What the announcement we saw today—that those enrolment levels and those forecasts were not fulfilled that there were not as many students enrolled at most universities. I say most because in fact there was one university that did reach its enrolment forecast—I'd just like to give a shout-out to the University of Canterbury if I can be a little bit parochial for a moment there. So we see that because of that ours is a Government that has been willing to work with the sector to find solutions and put in place some ways in which we can remedy it. That is in no way an error on the part of the Government. So I think we just need to check our outrage at the door a little bit on the other side of the House.The other place where of course it's a really good example—if we work our way through these documents we can see underspends. It's not only in the funding that would go to universities that result from lower enrolments but you also see it in terms of the payments for student allowance. Because when you have lower enrolments for students there will also be lower payments paid out in terms of student allowance and that is another area in this bill where we do see some adjustments being made. So these are important documents. They're important documents for any Government of the day to be able to make sure because Estimates are just that—Estimates are forecasts of what is going to be spent. Anyone who has managed a budget in any organisation knows that the actuals against forecasts can move around and that you need to have a process for tidying that up and that is exactly what this process is about and has been the case since 1989. Sometimes actually there are as many as three imprest supply bills that are passed in a given year—sometimes two but sometimes as many as three. So before anyone gets too excited about that I think that that's an important part to note.I think what this document does also show is it's an important document that chronicles really the responsive and agile way that our Government has responded to what happened in January in terms of the cyclone the fact that there did need to be expenditure. It wasn't anticipated when that 2022-23 Budget was put together when that 2022-23 Budget was passed. But none the less this was an activity that the Government had to respond to. We needed to make sure that we had funding not only for some immediate repair work but also in terms of a range of supports for people in Auckland and on the East Coast and in other parts of New Zealand that were affected by those extreme weather events. You'll see that right back through these imprest supply and Supplementary Estimates documents. I'm sure if you go back and look at those documents following the February earthquakes in Canterbury you will see similar adjustments that had to be made because there were immediate things that needed to be done. I think anyone expects that every Government would come on to that.We did see from the deputy leader of the Opposition the finance spokesperson of the National Party a speech that was largely more about the Estimates. I found it a really depressing speech. If you were only to believe what was in that speech that everything was terrible that New Zealand was the worst place in the world to be—it was so negative. I think that one of the things that I know when I'm out and about speaking to people is that people acknowledge that it is really hard out there at the moment. People are doing it tough.But if we look at the facts if we look at the evidence—we had the previous speaker say that what was in these documents was driving inflation it was spraying money around it was leading to inflation that seemed to have no chance of ever coming down. That was the indication I got from the speech that I sat here and listened to. But actually if you listen to the economists what we're hearing is most economists are now thinking that inflation has peaked that we're looking at inflation coming down. It won't come down straight away but we will look at it getting back into range in the coming months ahead and that is a credit—Hon Michael Woodhouse: Eh? Month?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Well months as a plural Mr Woodhouse. It has an S" on the end of it. So if we look out over the next 12 months the next year that what we see is we have economists from—Matt Doocey: So years now.Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: No; months Mr Doocey. We have a look at the Westpac economists saying that interest has passed its peak—and I think it's really really unfortunate that we have an Opposition that seems to find that that's a negative thing that inflation will begin to come down. We're seeing this globally. Because of course inflation—and what we're seeing isn't something that is only being experienced in New Zealand. We're seeing that play out in countries around the world and for New Zealand that is something that is really positive for us that we will see that come down.But I think one of the things that has kept us going through this period in good shape is the fact that we still have those really low unemployment figures. That's one of the things that is threaded through all of our finance documents and reflects the incredibly hard work that our Minister of Finance has put in. It is not by accident that we have such low unemployment rates in New Zealand; it is because of a determined programme of work by our Government and led by our excellent Minister of Finance the Hon Grant Robertson that we have put at the centre of so much of our decision making how it is that we're going to ensure that people stay in work. That is important. It is fundamental. The name's on the tin for us on this side of the House: we are the Labour Party and work and jobs are important. I think back to those months in March 2020 when that was such an important consideration and we can see that that has flowed through into these Supplementary Estimates. We can see it in the imprest supply that these are the important things.But I just would like to reiterate that this is standard practice. This is not an out-of-cycle bill that is being put to the House. This is what Governments have done since 1989. Each and every—each and every—Government has done it. It is a very technical debate. I think if you look through as I did a couple of votes you can see some really interesting threads to follow through and it is important that we do that. These are difficult documents to deal with the sheer bulk of them but they do tell an important part and give an important insight into what is happening in the New Zealand economy. Thank you Mr Speaker."