Wade-Brown Celia; Tuiono TeanauCELIA WADE-BROWN (Green): On behalf of the Greens we do not support the Public Finance (Fines Collection Costs—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill. I support my colleague the Hon Dr Duncan Webb who spoke about the disproportionate impact on Māori and Pacific that is listed by the Ministry of Justice. But I want to focus on the lack of good faith—the lack of good faith—with local government.No one who voted in the election—that seems a very long time ago now—expected that this cost would be rather randomly transferred from central government to local government. Nobody campaigned on that transfer so I don't see why there is a justification for the urgency for the complete lack of consultation and for the complete lack of evidence. And how much revenue? Let's just take that little part that is coming from increasing the retained percentage: $285000. Well I can understand central government trying to scramble to pay for the $2.9 billion in tax cuts. This really isn't going to get there.This amount of money is not collected in the rural councils. Many rural councils don't have parking enforcement at all because they don't have those issues. It's going to be fundamentally the large urban councils that this will affect the most. And I would make a somewhat educated guess that probably about $100000 of that will be directly to Auckland. They've just gone out and they've done their consultation on the long-term plan. I'm horrified that $100000 in a council's budget is landed on them from 1 July when they have already set their budget and planning.It isn't the hugest quantum that councils have to deal with but it's symptomatic of not respecting local government's consultation processes. It shows a disdain. Even if this had to be confidential because it's so urgent such an important part of the Budget—which I am sceptical about—at least somebody could have let local government know yesterday when the Budget came out. But no they found out for themselves this morning. I don't think that shows due respect.Grant McCallum: Is that it? Are you sitting down?CELIA WADE-BROWN: Wait and see—wait and see.Glen Bennett: Pause for effect—I love it; it's powerful.CELIA WADE-BROWN: I'm just not sure what the effect might be so we'll see!There is such limited financial information. There is no reasonable basis for decision making. Yes it may be in the scheme of $2.9 million—billion sorry. Actually it's small even compared to $2.9 million but I don't think that the amount is an excuse for bad process. It's a studied arrogance rather than a partnership. There is nothing else in this whole Budget that helps local government. There is nothing for city and regional deals. There is no GST back on rates whether it's new developments or whether it's actually the whole of the rates system. Where is the money in the Budget for central government to pay rates on the buildings it owns. It's just an unfair system that could have been worked better in partnership.Maybe we'll look forward to the next Budget actually having some lines where that money is returned and instead of having one of the lowest percentages of spending for local government compared to central government in the OECD maybe we can balance things and give back more to the local community.The other thing that has not been mentioned here is the suggestion that councils will be 45 percent—I'm not quite sure—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): The member's time has expired.