9. Question No. 9—FinanceHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 9—Finance9. Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of Finance: What advice if any has he received from the Treasury on potential job losses and other economic consequences for families and businesses from the return to stricter lockdown levels in response to the latest community outbreak and for the lockdown extension announced yesterday?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): I've received a range of advice from Treasury on the fiscal and economic impacts of this global pandemic and indeed the Government's strategy to respond to it. This continues to support the view that the best economic response is a strong public health response. Treasury's assessment of the latest alert level decision includes looking at the Government's approach through the wellbeing approach and Living Standards Framework. This is important because the Government can not only take a narrow short-term view on these significant decisions which impact New Zealanders' lives and livelihoods. Our approach is to take a balanced decision which incorporates all advice including from health experts and which incorporates the potential medium- and long-term implications of the decisions we make. On this specific resurgence of the virus Treasury's estimate is that the impact on GDP is $500 million per week. This fits within the range of other economic forecasters who have estimated this to be between $300 million and $600 million per week. The number of jobs affected by the current resurgence is difficult to forecast given that these are specific business decisions that will take into account the impact of wage subsidies other Government support and how quickly we move back down the alert levels.Hon Paul Goldsmith: What analysis if any has he had done on the impact of the current lockdowns and their extensions on workers business owners and their families both financially and in terms of mental health?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well I've given the member some detail of the financial impact. When it comes to mental health that is an ongoing piece of work undertaken by the Ministry of Health. If the member wants further details on those questions he'd be best to put that down to the Minister of Health.Hon Paul Goldsmith: What's his response to Adrian Evans owner of Auckland barber shop The Gentry who told TVNZ's Breakfast The second lockdown however has had a much deeper impact on not only financially but also on the team's wairua—you know the mental health aspect. I'm not saying anyone's calling up the helplines or anything but there's a lot more chat amongst my guys on the team. So that's certainly an aspect. If we go to another level 3 again that'll be fatal I reckon."?SPEAKER: There's no ministerial responsibility for that for this Minister.Hon Paul Goldsmith: The Minister as Minister of Finance—talking to the point of order—is responsible for the economic consequences of the lockdown. And this is in relation to the broader wellbeing responses to the lockdown. We've just had a Wellbeing Budget and we haven't defined economics and strictly sort of dollars and cents but a broader wellbeing. I don't know why you've taken such a narrow view of responsibilities for consequences.SPEAKER: Well I'm not responsible for you not understanding that.Hon Paul Goldsmith: All right. Thank you very much. That's very kind of you Mr Speaker. Has he specifically asked for any analysis from Treasury on the impact of these lockdowns on workers on business owners and their families both financially and in terms of mental health?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I indicated in my answer one of the lenses through which Treasury are looking at this is in the context of the wellbeing framework and I thank the member for his endorsement of the importance of that broader approach. So the Treasury are looking at it in that context and clearly when it comes to specific matters around the mental health response as I said in my primary answer that is a matter for the Minister of Health.Hon Paul Goldsmith: So what does the analysis show?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As again I said in my primary answer what it shows is that the best economic response is a strong public health response. That is a matter that on this side of the House we have been utterly consistent on from day one.Hon Paul Goldsmith: Well if indeed that is the case that "the best economic response [to this pandemic] is a strong public health response." why did his Government not regularly test everyone who worked at the border or in quarantine facilities?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well as the member knows that matter has been traversed at length both in this House and outside of this House. What we do know is that nearly 40000 people have been through our managed isolation facilities and we have had one case which is not linked to the current community outbreak. What we also know is that the approach that the Government has taken has meant that our economy was back up and running in June July and the first 12 days of August in a way that few other countries were able enabling a strong economic recovery. That is because of the strong public health response.Hon Paul Goldsmith: What responsibility if any does the Government take for the severe economic damage caused by having to return to lockdown and to extend it?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As has been covered in an earlier answer by the Minister of Health this is a virus; it is a tricky virus. When you compare New Zealand's response to the rest of the world you will see that New Zealand's response—which was strong which was decisive and which happened early—allowed the New Zealand economy to get back going again in a way that other countries have not been able to do.Hon Paul Goldsmith: So—SPEAKER: No no the member's run out of supplementary questions."