English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:648;Page:17241] 
4.  
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Leader—National) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: What is Treasury’s best estimate of how much of the operating and capital spending allowances for Budget 2009 have already been committed or allocated? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 I welcome the National Party’s first question on the Budget which was delivered 2 months ago today. However the answer to the member’s question is contained already in the Budget documentation at pages 125 to 126 of B2 and B3 plus in addition $750 million pre-committed for health. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister confirm that in papers prepared for the Budget he has received advice from Treasury that $1.2 billion of the $1.75 billion operating allowance for next year’s Budget is either pre-committed or is spending that it says would be difficult to scale down and is this advice correct? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: That is the advice from Treasury and I commend it to the member to think about very carefully. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Has he seen any reports on the impact of changing economic conditions on spending or revenue reduction commitments? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Yes. I have seen a report indicating that neither changing economic conditions nor fiscal imperatives should make any difference to plans for major reductions in Government revenue. That came from Mr Key which perhaps explains why he does not want to hear Mr English’s questions. 
Hon Bill English 
: Did the Minister himself take Treasury advice into account that most of next year’s spending allocation was already committed when he sent out the Associate Minister of Finance Trevor Mallard to talk about moving progressively towards a universal student allowance rather than directly to one when the full cost of that move is $728 million per year? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The member needs to check that figure of $728 million per year and in any case Labour—[ 
Interruption 
] Yes it is $728 million over the 4-year forecast period so again it has taken 2 months for the member to get a figure fairly substantially incorrect. But further than that progressive movement towards a universal allowance I think has been Labour policy for at least the last three manifestos which is why we have lifted the eligibility— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: 9 years. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The member might explain his own lawyer’s trust account at this point perhaps. This is why we have lifted the parental spending limit very substantially while we have been in office and increased the proportion of people eligible for a student allowance who meet the other criteria. 
Hon Bill English 
: Did the Minister take into account Treasury advice when his Associate Minister said: “There is … a possibility of assembling locomotives in New Zealand … It’s probably a very logical thing to do from a currency perspective from a value for money perspective.” and no doubt from an electoral perspective for that member and is any funding for Trevor Mallard’s sheltered railway workshop policy included in the $1.75 billion allowance? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I love it when the National Party really lets its trousers down and lets its prejudices show completely to the public. Mr English assumes that New Zealand workers cannot assemble railway locomotives efficiently yet they can be quite efficient dairy farmers and quite efficient at all kinds of things. Indeed $200000 has been set aside on the recommendation of those with knowledge of the system to look at whether it is feasible to assemble locos in this country because they are very large things to import fully built up. That member has no faith in New Zealand workers; I do have faith in New Zealand workers. That explains why National wants to flog everything off to foreigners to own and to run. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister understand why the public has no faith in him when alongside the pledge to begin manufacturing locomotives in New Zealand the Government is also talking about a universal student allowance and has to find $200 million next year to honour its agreements made in the teachers’ pay round when it appears that even Treasury is telling it that there is only about $300 million of money to be spent next year? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Money for the teachers’ pay round is in the Budget already. You see the problem with National Party members coming to the House with a great stream of pre-prepared pre-written and pre-typed questions is that they never listen to the answers. Mr English talks about the pledge to build locomotives when in fact what is being investigated is the feasibility of assembling locomotives. Mr English does not know the difference between building a locomotive and assembling one. That explains why those members do not know the difference between privatisation and keeping ownership in New Zealand hands. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister confirm that because he has left unallocated spending of a fraction of what Labour is used to spending each year we are going to see over the next 3 months a parade of 10-year plans aspirational objectives and current expenditure cooked up as capital expenditure so that Labour can promise to spend an awful lot of money and pretend to keep inside its Budget? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: What we will see is a parade of massive subterranean spending promises like “We will borrow whatever is required to pay for all of local government’s infrastructure needs.” and a massive tax cut programme that cannot be funded except by borrowing and it will be called the National Party manifesto. We like the National Party releasing policy because with every policy it releases the gap between National and Labour goes down by 1 percent.