Robertson GrantHon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): Just before I respond to Nicola Willis' questions there I just want to acknowledge the contribution by Chlöe Swarbrick and I do think that I don't have enough time today to go into all of the issues that she's raised. But clearly on this side of the House the future of the New Zealand economy has to be one that is based on sustainability on productivity improvements on inclusion and not on speculation in the housing market and not on requiring the population to simply grow in order to do that as well. We understand that. That's a long-term transition for the economy and that reduction of inequality is very significant and important to us.Also for Mr Bayly again not really enough time to go into it but the question of moving towards more targeted spending is clearly where all countries in the world are going. I understand the point he's making. We actually withdrew our equivalent of the main Australian support with the wage subsidy scheme at an equivalent time. We have other schemes like the Small Business Cashflow (Loan) Scheme that had carried on where we see a greater and longer-term benefit there beyond COVID. But I actually think the relative withdrawal of support is quite similar. In terms of targeting the industries Minister Nash has already outlined in the speech he gave earlier in the year the way in which we're going to continue to support the tourism industry. We do the same with international education. We understand the importance of that.In response to the comments from Nicola Willis I do think it's very important to understand what the Auditor-General said and I too am quoting from the Auditor-General in his letter to Nicola Willis. I quote: To summarise the concern that you raised (that the Government unlawfully used the KiwiBuild Housing appropriation to authorise the land purchase) did not eventuate." So that actually was what the Auditor-General said—that that concern did not eventuate. The concern that the Auditor-General had and that the member has moved on to is the question of whether or not in the decision and in the creation of the appropriation that took place on the time line that the member has outlined two important clauses from the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development were put in place that would acknowledge that imprest supply would be the source of that funding. The Ministry of Housing and Urban Development failed to put those two clauses in the paper and so for the period of time from 17 February when that was signed off until 17 March when the normal regular March baseline update was done there was an unappropriated expenditure. As we say far from ideal—far from ideal but not uncommon. Seventy-one times in the last five years of the previous National Government—71 times. So yes there was a technical fault there—we accept that—as there were 71 times under the previous National Government in its final five years. In fact this is so common we have a whole process for it that goes through Parliament where we validate that particular expenditure. The Government—Nicola Willis: Dodgy deal sneaking it through.Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Ha! Well only dodgy Nicola Willis if 71 times it was dodgy when the National Party did it.What I can say about the overall traction at Ihumātao is that the Government did make a pragmatic decision in the best interests of all New Zealanders to find a resolution and a solution there. It will involve housing. It will—[A member stumbles] Mr Goldsmith nice to see you. It will involve housing but it will be done in a way that is sensitive to the mana whenua that understands the importance of the area to the people of Auckland. It is a challenging and difficult issue but it's one that I believe the Government is on the right path on."