Brownlee Gerry; Dean JacquiHon GERRY BROWNLEE (National): I wonder if the Minister of Finance might elaborate a little bit—I'm speaking to Mr Bayly's Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) and the importance of it—on why he needed to go to a recent appropriation of some $3 billion to cover the sorts of activities that Mr Bayly's SOP should at least in some part prevent. Was the Minister not able to tell us why he sought a $3 billion appropriation?Hon Grant Robertson: That's not in the bill.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: But it is a matter that relates directly to the SOP that Mr Bayly has got on the Table. Mr Bayly has highlighted in his SOP a potential funding problem for the bank. We know that the Minister has taken that action of seeking a $3 billion appropriation to cover such events that have occurred in the bank and for the Minister to say Well it's not part of the bill." is absolutely correct—the $3 billion is not part of the bill. That's straight out of the pockets of the New Zealand taxpayer to cover the sorts of events that Mr Bayly is trying to prevent with his SOP and which have occurred in the bank. It seems odd that we could have a Reserve Bank Act or a new Act of Parliament coming in to govern the Reserve Bank that doesn't cover off the potential for these sorts of losses which of course fall on the New Zealand taxpayer. So perhaps my question was the wrong one. Is there any way that the Minister is able to confidently tell the House that the sorts of issues that are being raised by Mr Bayly will not cost the New Zealand taxpayer in the future?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): We have now covered this matter extensively over the last few contributions. I'm being clear for Mr Brownlee: what the bill currently does is give the Minister the ability through clause 205A to set a minimum level or direct the bank about a minimum level of capital and set expectations as to the bank's financial risk management. The way in which we were able to manage the issue of the large-scale asset purchases was via an indemnity that the Government put in place because we believed it was in the public interest to do so. That is a way of managing the risk. Mr Bayly wants to manage risk in a different way by setting up a capital and financial risk management framework through a process that we've covered in earlier interventions that I don't actually necessarily think will achieve what he wants it to do. I think that we can have confidence that the arrangements we've got in place in the bill can protect us in the situation as Mr Brownlee has raised and indeed we have managed it through a similar process and the indemnity process. So I don't believe that we are adding great value by the proposal that Mr Bayly has put in place but I respect and understand it. I see what Mr Bayly wants to do here. I'd argue Mr Brownlee that it's actually the opposite of what you were saying before. This is actually a greater level of involvement from the Minister in the affairs of the bank not a lesser one.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members the time has come for me to leave the Chair for the dinner break. The House will resume at 7 o'clock.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m."