4. Question No. 4—FinanceHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 4—Finance4. Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) to the Minister of Finance: Is he satisfied that all initiatives funded from the COVID-19 Response and Recovery Fund are for COVID-19 response and recovery and that had the COVID-19 outbreak not occurred last year they would not have been funded?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): Yes I am satisfied that they are supporting the response and recovery bearing in mind that decisions on funding have been made at different times over the past 18 months in light of the circumstances at that time. In answer to the second part of the question that is entirely hypothetical as COVID-19 did occur last year.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Does he think it's responsible fiscal management to use the cover of the COVID fund to initiate substantial new Government spending over and above the published Budget allowances on non-COVID projects?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I reject various parts of the premises of that question. What I would say to the member is that over the last 18 months New Zealand has experienced the greatest economic shock in a century. Therefore as a country and as a Government we have had to respond to that in a variety of ways. That includes both immediate response but also recovery measures to ensure that the New Zealand economy continues to work well and the good news is that it has relative to the rest of the world.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Why did the $710 million for three waters reform need to be funded from the COVID response and recovery fund?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I'm sure the member opposite is aware of the parlous state of water infrastructure right around New Zealand. That decision was made as part of an important part of ensuring confidence and certainty for our construction sector to know that there would be projects there for them. He needs to bear in mind that throughout 2020 there were significant concerns that both the horizontal and vertical construction sectors would struggle to operate in a post-COVID environment. That was an area where the Government was able to kill two birds with one stone: address a longstanding issue and also give certainty to the construction companies that would be involved in the work.Hon Chris Hipkins: Would the Government have been in as strong a position to respond to the current outbreak if the balance of the COVID-19 Response and Recovery Fund (CRRF) had been spent on tax cuts and roads?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: No we would not and when the proposal was made in August and September last year to spend billions of dollars on tax cuts and pet transport projects that was a proposal that that particular group of people wanted to make. That was their priority; we have our priorities.Hon Michael Woodhouse: How is an art documentary based on Papua New Guinea tattoo practice and revival COVID-related?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well it's interesting that the member opposite would rather that the arts and creative sector in New Zealand withered away in the face of COVID. Providing support to our artists and our creatives to be able to get through COVID when many of the opportunities they had to generate income were taken away by COVID-19 is an extremely responsible thing to do. It is quite clear the member and his party do not care for the artists and creatives in New Zealand; we do.Hon Chris Hipkins: Can the finance Minister confirm that a significant proportion of the business financial assistance provided through the COVID-19 relief and recovery fund has gone to fund things that aren't directly related to the COVID-19 response?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Indeed—what we have done is ensured that businesses in New Zealand have cash flow and they have confidence that they are able to plan that they are able to develop their businesses. This is a fund that has served New Zealand incredibly well. We have an economy that is operating at pre-COVID levels which only a handful of other countries can claim and we have unemployment down at 4 percent. The CRRF has been an important part of making sure that our economy has recovered.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Well in light of that if all of those projects have merit why weren't they subject to the normal Budget process rather than funded from the COVID response fund?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: They were subject to Budget processes such as looking at their value for money such as assessing them against the Living Standards Framework. In some cases—Hon Michael Woodhouse: That's not a process.Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: —it is—there were situations where funding was required urgently in order to be able to address specific needs but I'm sure the member would understand that that is what is required in a pandemic. Everything has been appropriated properly through the processes of this Parliament.