Robertson Grant; O'Connor GregAPPROPRIATION (2022/23 SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES) BILLIMPREST SUPPLY (FIRST FOR 2023/24) BILLSecond ReadingsHon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): I move That the Appropriation (2022/23 Supplementary Estimates) Bill and the Imprest Supply (First for 2023/24) Bill be now read a second time. This is a feature of the House's programme of looking after expenditure in the House. I'm just looking at the—yes Mr Speaker that's right: I've plenty to say but don't need a stopped clock to do so. This is a regular part of the—Chris Penk: It just feels like it! Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Just like Mr Penk a stopped clock tells the right time at least twice a day. It's good to have it going now though. This is a regular part of the financial processes of this House to put these two bills together and pass them in the way that we are. I think it might be helpful at the outset just to go through again for members exactly what these two bits of legislation do. The Appropriation (2022/23 Supplementary Estimates) Bill seeks appropriation by Parliament of changes to appropriations and new appropriations for the 2022/23 financial year that the Government agreed to between 22 April when the 2022/23 Estimates were finalised and 23 April when the 2022/23 Supplementary Estimates were finalised. Spending against these appropriations has already been incurred under the authority of imprest supply but unless this spending is appropriated by Parliament before the end of the 2022/23 financial year it would become other unauthorised expenditure requiring validation by Parliament in the appropriation (confirmation and validation) bill. I want to thank members of the Finance and Expenditure Committee for their prompt—Chlöe Swarbrick: Great committee. Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: —indeed a great committee—scrutiny of and report back to the House on the 2022/23 Supplementary Estimates bill. The Imprest Supply (First for 2023/24) Bill is needed to provide the sole parliamentary financial authority for Government spending in 2023/24 until the Appropriation (2023/24 Estimates) Bill—the Budget—is passed. As the third reading on the latter bill must take place before the House rises on 31 August before the election this imprest supply bill provides supply for the first two months of the 2023/24 financial year. In addition it is standard practice for imprest supply bills to cover possible materialisation of fiscal risks and the uncertain timing and spread of expenditure. On the imprest supply bill just briefly what it does this time around is seek sufficient authority for the Government to incur a maximum of $27 billion in expenses $9 billion in capital expenditure and $1 billion of capital injections. The total imprest in the bill is lower than what has been provided over the last three years. That's partly because it's dealing with only expenditure up until the general election but also because the amount provided has been declining over time as the COVID-19 emergency response spending has become a less significant part of what the Government is doing. As I've said many times when I've spoken on imprest supply bills these are limits; they are not targets. They provide room for the Government to be able to undertake the business of Government until such time as the Budget has passed but they also by necessity build in a buffer to that approach in the unlikely event that something occurs that means we need to use expenditure that hadn't otherwise been foreseen. Obviously during the COVID period this was happening on a much more regular basis and therefore we were closer to the limits on occasions. I would expect in this case to be quite some distance from the limit unless there is some largely unforeseen thing that arises. So imprest supply is very much part of the way Government runs due to the timing of the return of the Budget from select committees where it currently is being interrogated and it is an important part of allowing the Government to get about its business until that time. Returning to the Appropriation (2022/23 Supplementary Estimates) Bill I do just want to take the time of the House to highlight the fact that this bill does contain the Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) that has just very recently been tabled into the House. That is not the normal practice when it comes to this kind of bill but it does happen from time to time. I can recall debating it when I was in Opposition and I can also recall doing it during the COVID period. This occurs when we end up with some expenditure that is required by the Government to be undertaken after the time at which the Supplementary Estimates are finalised. The Supplementary Order Paper in this case relates to the Government's expenditure that we'll be undertaking when it comes to the North Island weather events and the need to have a policy in place to be able to manage those who will have to relocate from their current residences as well as some other expenditure that is required with relationship to support for councils to be able to undertake works. While not much if any of that expenditure will actually take place during this financial year given that the Government has taken a decision that it will cost-share these situations with local government it is necessary to reflect that into the Supplementary Estimates. So in many ways it is accounting that leads us to this place. While we don't expect to pay out that money in the financial year what the public finance rules tell us is that if the Government makes a serious determination that it will be doing this we then have to account for it under the rules of good financial management. So an amount has been put aside there for this. That is to make sure that we have appropriated the funding; it doesn't meant that it will necessarily be spent. So I hope that that is clear for the House as to why that came about. It came about due to the timing of the decision to do that after the Supplementary Estimates closed. There is of course a committee stage for this bill which will take place immediately after the second reading where we will be able to go into in any more detail that members want on the Supplementary Order Paper. Committee stages are not used to debate the individual Supplementary Estimates but where there is an SOP the committee stage offers an opportunity for us to be able to do that. More broadly in terms of the Supplementary Estimates what they show is that throughout the period of the year there have been reasons to alter appropriations. Sometimes I think when members are considering such matters they consider perhaps that we're talking about all new extra expenditure. That is not always the case. Sometimes an appropriation changes its nature as opposed to the amount of money that is going in. Sometimes it is simply to enable spending to remain appropriated and fit within the appropriations. So an example for that was a change to Vote Conservation in the Supplementary Estimates this time around where the Jobs for Nature funding had changed its nature and rather than leave the appropriation as it was that was altered and updated. Sometimes it indicates that there has been a need for extra funding and on a number of occasions in the Supplementary Estimates that are in front of the House today that has been caused by the fact that the cost of doing things—the inflation issues that we've debated many times in this House—have affected Government expenditure. So one example of that is a change in Vote Corrections which is largely around the Waikeria Prison project and the fact that the expenditure on that has been greater than expected due to some of the finance costs and inflationary costs that are related to that. So that is a reason to be able to make changes. Sometimes when we make changes to Supplementary Estimates it's because of circumstances well and truly beyond control. So for example in putting together the census when Cyclone Gabrielle hit there was a need to make changes to the way census collection occurred to ensure that we did have those in the areas affected by Cyclone Gabrielle counted and so Vote Statistics has a change within the Supplementary Estimates here to make sure that we were able to count all of those people. So that's an example of where some matter that was unforeseen means that an appropriation needs to change. Sometimes it's to do with the way in which we fund things. So members of the House will be well aware that the Government over a reasonably long period of time now has been subsidising the cost of fuel both through the fuel excise duty and road-user charges. What that means is that in order to make up the difference from what is required for the National Land Transport Fund the Government has been topping that fund up rather than it being through revenue. That has to be reflected in the Supplementary Estimates as a change in terms of the way that the Government goes about what it does. So essentially the Supplementary Estimates reflect the activities of Government through the period of the year that weren't foreseen or weren't part of the original Budget documentation and as I say along with the imprest supply bill that we have in front of us today this is legislation that is usual and normal and part of our parliamentary process. The one exception this year as I noted is around the SOP that we have which as I say we will be able to have the opportunity to go through during the committee stage of this debate. But I would just emphasise again that the timing of that decision came after the close-off of the Supplementary Estimates. I hope members of the House would agree that providing certainty to those who are in areas that have been affected by the cyclone justifies the approach that we are taking here. But as I say actually this is simply to make sure that we record the decision as opposed to that expenditure taking place in the remaining week of the financial year or indeed up until the audit of accounts is finished. It just makes sure that we have tidied away a decision that Government has made and that members of the House can be clear about that. With that I commend these bills to the House. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is that the motion be agreed to.