Robertson GrantHon GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour): Thank you very much Mr Chair. I want to speak to two amendments in the names of my colleagues that are on the Table to Part 2. The first of those is Deborah Russell's amendment for a new clause 10. This is amending section 119 of the principal Act and it specifically focuses on what the monetary policy committee must have regard to in formulating monetary policy. It adds after section 119(1)(a) of the current Act a new section 119(1)(b) to say the importance of protecting and promoting strong and stable employment in the New Zealand economy". Now the phrase "strong and stable" is one that colleagues opposite might quite like. You know it's something that they're aspiring towards in other matters. But here it is about strong and stable employment in the New Zealand economy.Really this is simply an example of the Opposition attempting to fulfil the very thing that the Minister has said she supports. That is the idea that there should be flexibility in what the Reserve Bank does when it's considering the setting of monetary policy. But we are adding to that some specificity about the kinds of things they can consider.This really comes to the crux of the entire debate that we have been having—or the argument that we've been given by the Government anyway—which is that they were told by the Reserve Bank Governor in a letter and the chair of the Reserve Bank board that the Reserve Bank favoured prioritisation of inflation targeting over the maximum sustainable employment goal. Fine. Not what this side of the Chamber happens to believe but it is what the Reserve Bank Governor and the board chair wrote to the Minister and indeed the Minister appeared to tell us she supported that.This amendment in Deborah Russell's name actually allows what the Minister seems to be saying to now be put into the law and that is that we now have that consideration of strong and stable employment when the Reserve Bank is formulating its monetary policy and pursuing its economic objectives.We've had a number of times the Minister tell us that clarity is what matters. We need certainty and clarity. Well that's what this amendment does. It provides clarity to the bank and indeed financial markets and indeed the wider public that this is what should be considered when monetary policy decisions are being formulated. So I think it is an amendment well worth the committee's consideration to support. It actually backstops during the debate what we have heard from the Minister that she believes should be happening.The second amendment that I want to draw the committee's attention to is the amendment to clause 10 in the name of the Hon Megan Woods which is to amend clause 10 to after section 123(2)(b) insert a new (c) that says "an additional economic objective". Again this is about backing up what we've heard from the Minister she believes should happen which is that there should be flexibility in the way that the Government responds to unexpected circumstances.This is really quite critical because having now reduced the Reserve Bank's objectives down to one objective I think there is a serious issue now with the Act which is that the objectives no longer fulfil the purposes of the Act. So the purposes were changed in 2019 and we wanted to make sure that the wellbeing and the overall economic position of New Zealanders was the purpose of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Act. We're now down to just one objective to fulfil quite a complex purpose there. So this amendment by the Hon Megan Woods to clause 10 actually specifically says you can have an additional economic objective. That at least in some ways continues to safeguard the connection between the objectives of the Act and the purpose of the Act.So these are two serious amendments proposed by my colleagues that I believe should be considered strongly by the Minister. Again I repeat: if not what else? We haven't had an answer to that question so therefore it still lies on the Table as a live consideration. But I believe the two amendments that have been put forward by my colleagues will at least mean that the flexibility is there alongside some clarity about what New Zealanders should expect the Reserve Bank to be considering when it sets monetary policy."