SpeechALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa): Thank you Madam Speaker. Well it was pleasing to hear that Michael Wood has been listening to us on this side of the House. He quoted a number of our concerns articulated by my colleagues earlier in the day. That's one good thing. What he needs to do now is go and listen to what New Zealanders also have to say. New Zealanders want to get to level 1 yesterday to quote the Deputy Prime Minister. That is an important issue: to be listening to those constituents that we represent. It's all very well saying that we should be doing this or that because Michael Wood thinks that is in the best interest but we represent New Zealanders. We reflect what New Zealanders want and they want level 1 yesterday.That's actually quite a simple way of resolving this and there's actually more members in this House who would like to be at level 1 than who do not given the Deputy Prime Minister's words over the last week. It would be very simple for him to move a motion and he might find that it would pass if that was to be the case. Nevertheless I'm not going to talk too much about the levels and that's been well-traversed. I'm concerned about a couple of things in the Budget. The first thing is the quality of the policies that have been put forward—the quality of the policies—and I'm talking about as my colleague Paulo Garcia mentioned earlier as an example the policy where the bank fronted up 20 percent of the loan and the other 80 percent would be guaranteed by the Government. Well the bank was still at risk for 20 percent of the loan. They were concerned about the people who they're lending to—so concerned about the prospects of that borrower that they didn't want to lend the money. The banks didn't want to lend the 20 percent that the Government wished them to lend. That is concerning. That policy failed and the Government replaced it with a 100 percent loan from the Government—from the taxpayer; remember this is taxpayer money not Government money—to businesses. The Government has to question why the banks didn't want to lend the money in the first place. Why should the taxpayer replace the bank in this example? Well it's because a lot of businesses are at risk clearly and will go down the toilet. They will fail. So why are we talking about putting good money after bad? I'm concerned that the questions have not been asked of some of the policies presented by this Government—not all the policies; the basic wage subsidy policy is one that is repeated around the world and it appears in my view at least to be a good one.The wage extension is another example of a policy that has not been thought through. If a business is down 50 percent of revenues over the previous 30 days compared to a year ago they are able to access taxpayer money. But you've got to ask the question: if the business is that far in the balance sheet weakness or income statement weakness why is the Government putting good money into a business which is basically insolvent—taxpayers' money. Remember Government members it is taxpayers' money you are dealing with. So my concern is around the thinking of the policies.The second concern I have is the fact of this almost incomprehensible slush fund of $20 billion. When Shane Jones had $3 billion of slush fund in his Provincial Growth Fund we and a lot of public up and down the country were concerned about the quality of the spend of the $3 billion—where the money was going. It was propping up mills that should never have been propped up and nurseries that should never have been subsidised—money wasted. Quite rightly we were holding the Government to account on that $3 billion. But now we've got a $20 billion slush fund—$20 billion. No one knows where it might be spent except perhaps the Minister. That is of a real concern to me: the accountability or lack of it around a $20 billion fund of taxpayers' money unallocated. And we heard the wish list from Michael Wood of some of the things that he is advocating for and some of the things that have been allocated to. So I'm concerned that the wish list of the left is being granted by the Minister of Finance using this disastrous economic situation to take advantage to deliver Michael Wood's wish list.