Adams AmyHon AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn): Thank you Mr Speaker. Yes look I am very pleased to come down and take a call on the Finance and Expenditure Committee's report into the Budget Policy Statement (BPS). I want to start actually on the core business of Budgets which is to address the economic situation of the Government and frankly the ability that we have to pay for all of this well-being rhetoric that we are hearing continually from the Government—no doubt frankly because the Government is more interested in slapping well-being stickers on everything and standing around and singing Kumbaya" than actually addressing real measurable outcomes. But I do want to talk about those fiscals because here's the hard cold reality that Labour is happy to ignore: if you don't have an economy that's growing well you don't have tax revenue to pay for the well-being initiatives. So you can talk about kindness and caring as much as you like but if you're presiding over an economy that is slowing the ability of a Government—any Government—to do anything for its citizens is reduced. I'd very much like to hear anyone on the other side get up and tell me that's not right—that actually it doesn't matter whether or not the economy is growing well to provide revenue. So here's the number I want to start by highlighting in the Budget Economic and Fiscal Update and it is this. Before the election in 2017 this current year we're in the year ending June 2019 was expected to have New Zealand growing at 3.7 percent—so 3.7 percent at the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Update. At last year's Budget that number had already dropped to 3.3 percent. In the BPS it's dropped to 2.9 percent and actually most commentators are saying it's far more likely to be 2.5 percent. So that is the first real year under this Government's economic management and we are seeing about a third whacked off the growth rate of this country. So while Grant Robertson wants to stand up and talk about well-being and mention very little about the economy the hard cold reality is that under his stewardship the economy is slowing down and that means our ability to do things for our citizens—to provide healthcare to provide education to provide police—is going backwards and that matters more to the long-term well-being of New Zealanders. Do they have a job? Do they have good incomes? But we're not allowed to measure that any more or talk about that; it's all got to be about how many friends they have made and what clubs they have joined. Actually by the way even that is only going to be reported every four years. So every four years Treasury this Budget Policy Statement tells us will give us an update on how well-being's looking. So if you want to talk about accountability this is a Government that is getting rid of accountability day by day by day and now once every four years they're going to have Treasury putting out an update on well-being. Well my question to the Government is this: where in that framework is there any proper assessment of how you'll make different choices within that Budget planning process? Where is the framework that says if we want to address mental health—as the Government's acknowledged they have—which initiative is the best place to do that? And how will we as a Government—I'm speaking for them. How will they hold themselves accountable to the public of New Zealand for what they've done? None of that—this well-being Budget has none of that. It has high-sounding virtue-signalling and lovely words while the economy slows and the Government gets rid of accountability. The Budget priorities that the Minister of Finance has come up with include one that talks about helping a productive economy transition to sustainability—and blah blah—and one that talks about building a thriving nation. Well my first message to Mr Robertson on his Budget priorities: if you want a productive economy if you want a thriving nation don't load up our economy our small businesses and our farmers with more taxes. Don't punish the productive sector by saying "Everybody who gets up goes to work saves invests and risks their own money to build something to create jobs we're coming after you because you're all rich little nasty people." or a word Cullen used that I won't repeat in this House. That is not how you build a thriving economy. You don't build productivity by saying to New Zealanders "The harder you work the more tax you're going to pay. The harder you work the more we're coming after you." and that is the clear message that this Government is giving to the people of New Zealand. That is not about having a productive economy. Let's talk about one of the most productive parts of our productive sector and that's agriculture. Well we put out some figures earlier this week because the Government has had none—put out none. They tell us they'll do that after they make their decision which is interesting. I would've thought you'd normally do the numbers as part of making the decision but no. Apparently according to Damien O'Connor they haven't bothered with numbers because they'll worry about that after they make the decision. But our numbers said that farmers are going to be hit significantly by these extra taxes being proposed. Well do you know what Federated Farmers came out today and said? They said that actually National are a bit light: the numbers are much tougher than that. Get this: Federated Farmers quoted a report from another group that said that just one of the new taxes that Grant Robertson is considering just one of them could eat up 123 percent of the profits of an average sheep and beef farm—123 percent of the profits. That is just one of the seven or eight taxes that are now under consideration by this Government and that's before they take—Brett Hudson: Oil and gas wasn't enough for them. Hon AMY ADAMS: —quite right Mr Hudson—billions of dollars out of our productive economy through their reckless ill-considered poorly communicated ban on oil and gas exploration. So Mr Robertson if you truly believed in making a thriving nation and building a productive sector you wouldn't be loading this country up with more taxes that go right to the heart of the people who create opportunities in this country who create wealth. Now the other thing we hear continually from this Government under the well-being Budget and in the Budget Policy Statement is this notion of needing to address disparities to create fairness. Well again it's all lovely waffly-sounding words but here's something they don't tell you: New Zealand is in the top half of the OECD for the fairness of our wealth distribution—the top half of the OECD for the fairness of our wealth distribution—well ahead of Australia well ahead of the UK and well ahead of the US and yet we're being told that somehow we have this tremendously unfair system. Well a few hard cold facts: the top half of taxpayers already pay all the net income tax in this country—all of it all of the net income tax—and yet we've got Michael Cullen saying those under $48000 need to be given huge numbers of more subsidies—SPEAKER: Order! Order! I'm going to interrupt the member and ask her to come back to the debate. It's a special debate. It is a relatively narrow debate and it is on the report of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the Budget Policy Statement. I'm giving this member a bit of warning but the rest of the House a bit of warning as well. This is what the debate is on. Hon AMY ADAMS: Thank you Mr Speaker. I refer the House to the Budget Policy Statement where the Minister of Finance specifically talks about this Budget being about addressing disparities in the economy and as part of considering distressing disparities in the economy it is important context to understand exactly where we sit. Now I am debating very definitely on that issue because the reality is you cannot continue to whack those who actually try and build that thriving nation Grant Robertson says he cares about at the same time as looking to support the half of the taxpayers who are not contributing to that net income tax take. That is the reality but it doesn't fit with Grant Robertson's well-being fairness bumper stickers and so he doesn't want to talk about that. But let's be really clear. Mr Robertson if you keep smacking the productive sector if you keep making it harder and people less incentivised to go out and build a business you will continue to see what you have seen over the first year of your time as Minister for Finance and that is an economy slowing down with more people on the unemployment queue more people waiting for State housing and more people needing assistance. That is the reality. The rhetoric doesn't live up to the reality. Now in my final minute I just want to touch on this well-being Budget framework because we've seen over the last little while just how shabbily put together this is. The Living Standards Framework is put together on Statistics New Zealand the people who brought you the success that was the last census—their Indicators Aotearoa New Zealand framework. Now that framework had some of the most pitiful pathetic consultation I have ever seen to inform it. What we have is the OECD telling us in New Zealand what a good life looks like and then the geniuses putting this together telling us things like having a friend or moving house is apparently more beneficial to you than avoiding diabetes. Now there's no issue with having a CBAx—we've had them; they can be useful tools—but when you're saying that moving house which is supposed to be one of the most stressful things you can do is of more benefit to a New Zealander than not getting diabetes then you know you haven't done the job well. So stop telling us about well-being Mr Robertson. Start doing things that actually improve it—SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member's time has expired."