Bayly AndrewANDREW BAYLY (National—Port Waikato): Thank you Madam Chair. I just wanted to take a moment to acknowledge Brian Corban and I also just—I wasn't going to do this but my mother passed away on the weekend so just for a little moment I'd just like to acknowledge her. So just continuing on with that debate with the business guarantee scheme Minister I'd say to you that the reason why it failed and the British actually pulled out of it—because people don't really understand the reason why and I think you've been a little bit careful with what you've said—is that the scheme requires the bank to put the business into receivership and whilst there is an 80 percent guarantee from the Government the bank has to make the running. So no bank wants to be seen to be putting companies into receivership and that's why the scheme failed in the UK and that's why you've had an incredibly low take-up in New Zealand because banks have been naturally very cautious in terms of wanting to be putting companies under which is exactly the point.The issue around the cash-flow scheme—Minister again I'd just say to you: it goes until 2023. I think the issue that we are facing as a nation is that we have got through most of it and I accept what you're saying we need to be prepared for an ongoing issue with COVID but principally the economy is going pretty well. I would urge you as the Minister to be thinking about how you target money now towards those sectors and industries that really need it. We've got places down the West Coast who are going to see people leaving those places because they haven't got a job. That will mean there won't be volunteers who will want to volunteer for fire brigades or anything like that. That is the essential thing. The reason I highlight this—and also Queenstown; Rotorua which I was in just very recently who are really suffering; those are areas and places that I urge you to start thinking about how you do that.The reason I am raising this is that Australia for instance has taken quite a defining view: they stopped most of their schemes at the end of March. New Zealand is unusual given that they were very similar to Australia—island nation and their economies and trade are relatively on the same level even keel—and yet they have taken the decision to stop re-pause and then redirect; you haven't taken that. That is why I'm concerned about the level of the continued operating spend that we are going to see coming through.The other issue I just wanted to touch on in your capacity as Minister for Infrastructure is the question around the delivery of that. I note slightly with some alarm that you are going to set up this unit within the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet and I hope that this is going to lead to a better outcome than what has been achieved to date and we're all well aware of a lack of delivery of many projects in Government but particularly the infrastructure spend. I note that back in July last year you announced to great fanfare $5 billion worth of infrastructure a mixture of shovel-ready projects and also the Primary Growth Partnership projects. Already we've had a scaling down of those jobs—they are significant. My question is: where have the billion dollars' worth of savings come from? Have they come because you are not delivering the infrastructure projects? Or have they come from other projects or other initiatives? Because if it is not coming from the infrastructure delivery that is really a difficult issue and a bad issue that the Government should have actually been doing over the last 12 months but hasn't.I have to question now with the construction agency so flat out and busy whether in fact the original intent actually now has passed—the timing has passed—and whether in fact you should be looking at different measures. Again I'm suggesting you need to be much more targeted.The last thing I want to touch on is off-balance-sheet funding. So the Housing New Zealand subsidiary of Kāinga Ora has a $7 billion off-balance-sheet funding arrangement; I know it hasn't spent all of it. It would be very interesting to see what extent it has taken that off-balance-sheet funding and also the situation with the New Zealand Transport Agency—again a large infrastructure provider. Because we know and we've heard today that a number of those projects may be delayed—whilst there seems to have been a commitment that they'll still be on the table; I sincerely hope they do continue. But if they are being delayed then it would be useful to understand what level of off-balance-sheet funding you are looking at and whether in fact you are going to increase that over time and certainly in the next Budget.