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 We have a responsibility as Government to ensure taxpayer dollars are spent wisely" and does he think all Government expenditure in the past five years has represented good value for money?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): I do stand by that statement. In answer to the second part of the question I'm proud as Minister of Finance to invest in the core public services that New Zealanders depend upon. This includes 10000 new public housing places 4000 more nurses 2900 more teachers while investing in schools and hospitals and protecting the lives and livelihoods of New Zealanders in response to a once in a century event like COVID19. Our approach has also delivered for New Zealand record low unemployment low public debt compared to countries that we normally compare ourselves with and a larger economy than before COVID. The Government has also reprioritised and refocused spending as the circumstances require ensuring we continue to be responsible managers of the Government's finances. In particular our decisive response to those affected by Cyclone Gabrielle has meant more than $400 million of funding has already been allocated to those most in need.Nicola Willis: Did the Minister receive the memo the Prime Minister allegedly issued urging constraint in public expenditure on consultants and contractors and if so how much has been spent on consultants and contractors to help design the now shelved New Zealand income insurance scheme?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: In answer to the second part of the question if the member wants to put down a specific question like that I can get it for her. I think the majority of the spending on the New Zealand income insurance scheme would have been funding to have the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment and ACC do the work but there may well have been some consultancy expenditure. In answer to the first part of the member's question as the Prime Minister has already indicated those expectations are clear.Nicola Willis: Why is the Minister of Finance not aware that the scheme he specifically urged be designed has so far cost New Zealand taxpayers $10.3 million worth of consultants and contractors; and how can that possibly represent good value for money when one of the first things the new Prime Minister did was to bin it?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The work on the New Zealand income insurance scheme in the words of the Prime Minister is important to make sure that we fill a gap in our social security system. I get it that the member doesn't care about people who get made redundant and doesn't care about people who lose their jobs through health conditions and disability. We will continue to fill that gap but as the Prime Minister has indicated in the current economic environment we have chosen to deprioritise it.Nicola Willis: Is the Minister aware that his own agency the Treasury in 2022 spent $8.2 million on consultants and is forecasting that this year—2023—it will up that considerably to $12 million?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As has already been traversed in question time today our expectation on Government agencies is that they use consultants when they need to and when they have to and not when they don't need to and they don't have to. What I would also say to the member though is that it's very easy for a Government not to spend money; that's when it doesn't do anything—that's when it doesn't address long-term issues like our water infrastructure; that's when it doesn't do the work to improve schools and hospitals; that's when it doesn't do the work to look after our transport networks. So by all means if the member wants to say that the National Party would never spend any money on consultants and contactors when they're in office do that but that would be a continuation of a do-nothing National GovernmentNicola Willis: Does the Minister consider the Government is getting good value from its spending on consultants and contractors when it seems that one of the markers of failure is just how big the bill for consultants is—for example the TVNZ-RNZ merger with a bill of $10 million or the three waters scheme fatally flawed with a bill for $26 million so far?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I'm pleased the member raises the three waters scheme because the member will be well aware that the kinds of issues being dealt with when it comes to three waters are ones where it is essential to bring in experts to do that. Again I know that the member's approach would be to completely ignore the quality of our water—would be to make sure that New Zealanders' rates bills go higher than they need to. It's completely possible to sit on your chuff and do nothing about water infrastructure. This Government is not prepared to do that.Nicola Willis: Can the Minister see that it is very hard for New Zealanders who are struggling through a cost of living crisis to understand why their money should be spent on consultants for projects that the Government has now shelved and is it the case to borrow a phrase from the Prime Minister that his party has now become "a consultant-driven industry"?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: In answer to the second part of your question no. In answer to the first part of the question we will continue to support New Zealanders through the cost of living crisis with policies that I know the member opposes but that actually lift people's incomes and lift people's wages and that will continue to be our priority. When we're in Government for a period of time from time to time there will be reprioritisation; there will be issues that need to be changed. The member might be familiar with a sheep farm in the Saudi desert! Not every piece of spending a Government does ends up quite the way you want it.Nicola Willis: Point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to table a document that is an Official Information Act response from ACC confirming $10.3 million has so far been spent on consultants and contractors—SPEAKER: And what's the date on it?Hon Member: Is it publicly available?SPEAKER: I'll deal with this—thank you. What's the date on it sorry?Nicola Willis: The 3rd of March 2023.SPEAKER: And is it publicly available?Nicola Willis: I didn't understand that to be the case but it could be.SPEAKER: Can anyone enlighten—Hon Paul Goldsmith: I've never seen it.SPEAKER: OK. Well I'll put the leave. Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. It may be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House."