2. Question No. 2—FinanceHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 2—Finance2. Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of Finance: What measures if any does he have in place to ensure New Zealanders receive good value for money from the Government's major spending initiatives?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): The 2019 Wellbeing Budget made use for the first time of a wellbeing analysis and Treasury's Living Standards Framework. Initiatives that sought new funding were assessed for their impact against the Living Standards Framework domains and for their intergenerational wellbeing outcomes. As the Wellbeing Budget states This meant [that] the Wellbeing Budget was developed with an understanding of the impacts it would have across the range of areas that matter to New Zealanders." The wellbeing analysis allows for a more robust and developed understanding of value for money than a simple understanding of the costs. As Tim Ng who is the chief economist at Treasury said this is the most rigorous approach we have ever seen to a Budget. Within major spending programmes there are of course various benchmarks measures and indicators. To give the member just one example of our work in child poverty not only are we committed to tackling one of our biggest long-term issues after nine years of neglect; we are also hitting the targets that are outlined in the Budget to address the shameful legacy left behind.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Halfway through the three years of the Provincial Growth Fund what hard data has he seen on the outcomes from the investment in terms of jobs so far?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I'm not sure if I would regard Minister Jones' interviews on Newshub Nation as hard data but I would certainly describe it as data of a sort. In that interview I heard him talk about a figure of a thousand jobs over two years. We are continuing to see fantastic outcomes. Just this morning I was in Rotorua at the Building Nations Symposium. Representatives of city councils and industry bodies across the country were praising the Provincial Growth Fund for the fact that finally we have a Government taking a long-term issue for New Zealand seriously.Hon Paul Goldsmith: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I did ask about jobs so far. He referred to jobs in the future. Are you happy with that?SPEAKER: Well I'm not sure that I could tell that was in the future or the current or whatever. I think it was more in the time of Matua Shane.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he have a system in place to keep a measure on how much the Government is spending for each KiwiBuild house delivered so far; and if so what is the figure?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: All initiatives funded in the Budget are there after the subject of the review process that the member participates in but are also reported against by each Government agency. No doubt in the fullness of time the member will find time to read the reports that come through from the KiwiBuild unit.Hon Paul Goldsmith: What has he got to show for the $317 million so far allocated to working groups?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I would strongly—strongly—question the number that the member is using and in particular the use of the phrase "working groups." I know that the Minister for Sport and Recreation frequently gets questions from the Opposition about the International Working Group on Women in Sport which is actually an international group—and they ask us how much it's costing us; so I actually would question that. What I would say is that one of the significant working groups we had was the one into mental health and addition. That is a serious long-term issue which will take many years to solve but we have made a very good start with the significant mental health package in the Budget.Hon Paul Goldsmith: So what is the figure that he would give to deal with the amount of money being invested in working groups so far by his Government?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: It would be a significantly smaller number than the one that the member gave. But it is an interesting contrast between people who like to base their policy on evidence—as we do on this side of the House—and people who would rather base it on some preconceived prejudice.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Which has created more jobs so far: the Provincial Growth Fund or his Government working groups?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I am quite sure that the Provincial Growth Fund right around this region is seen as a job-generation scheme. What I do know is it probably outstripped the big idea from the last Government of the nine-day fortnight which I know was their big idea and has clearly been taken on by this Opposition as their mode of working.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he think taxpayers are getting good value for money for the 2500 extra bureaucrats this Government has taken on in its first year of Government; and if so is he aware that that's the biggest increase in the number of bureaucrats since 2005 under the previous—Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Again I would want to look at the numbers that the member is putting forward to analyse them pretty closely. I do know that the statistics the previous Government used to use around numbers of public servants were created so that whole chunks of them were taken out so that they weren't counted. On this side of the House there are programmes that this Government has had to bring in to fix up the mess that we were left by the last Government. The hard-working public servants of New Zealand will remember how they're being described I'm sure.Hon Chris Hipkins: Can the Minister of Finance confirm that within the definition of "bureaucrats" there are people such as educational psychologists and teacher-aides that work directly with children people that work at the border and people that provide other front-line services directly to New Zealanders?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Quite clearly that is the case given the definition that the member opposite has just used. On this side of the House we have a great deal of respect for people who in some cases put their lives on the line for New Zealanders every single day. I do recall being in this House and hearing public servants previously called "useless bureaucrats" by people across the aisle there. It's not a term I choose to use.Hon Shane Jones: Does he agree given the stellar figures of economic growth—SPEAKER: Order! Order! I'm going to ask the member to ask a question and not do a self-promotion.Hon Shane Jones: I started with "Does he agree". That is an interrogative. Does he agree given there have been significant economic activity upgrades in those provinces that have enjoyed the fiscal leadership and attention from the Provincial Growth Fund that the two are connected?SPEAKER: Order! Order! Sit down. Are there any further supplementaries—in order?Hon Shane Jones: I want to make a point of order.SPEAKER: Well I'm going to be very strict if the member's not careful.Hon Shane Jones: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I want to make an important point here. We are drawing on publicly available economically robust data. I am inviting the Minister of Finance to draw an obvious conclusion: my good work and the good news.SPEAKER: No. The member will resume his seat. That was not a point of order. While the member has only ever shown a passing interest in the rules of the House he has been here long enough to know that that was not a point of order and in fact was disorderly. He will stand withdraw and apologise.Hon Shane Jones: I withdraw and apologise."