Bayly AndrewANDREW BAYLY (National—Hunua): Thank you Madam Chair. First of all I want to say that I do declare that I am happy. I just want that on the record. They're very unhappy over there I can see that. Also I think there's a bit of personal responsibility about looking after your own wellbeing but I do acknowledge it's an important concept. Clause 5 inserts new section 26KB Contents of fiscal strategy report: wellbeing objectives" which states "The fiscal strategy report must—(a) explain how wellbeing objectives have guided the Government's Budget decisions; and (b) if the wellbeing objectives that guided the Government's Budget decisions differ from those indicated in the budget policy statement most recently prepared…". So the issue I've got—the Minister talked about this being a guiding framework and it's related back to this Living Standards Framework. So actually I went to the Wellbeing Budget and this is the crux right because this is what you refer us to.So the first thing here in the Wellbeing Budget the very first item: "A new frontline service for mental health with a $455m programme providing access for 325000 people by 2023-24". So the first thing I've got to say is that is a financial expression of a target about how much money we're going to spend. In fact if I go through all these targets what it grandly promotes is how much money the Government is spending. What it doesn't talk about is what it's trying to achieve. I know if I turn to my colleague here Mr Matt Doocey—who is a mental health expert who I know has talked in this House about the so-called $1.9 billion that's been allocated to mental health. We've spent $27 million so far as a Government—when I say "we" I'm talking about the Government—a mere $27 million out of $1.9 billion. So here is a target that (a) is couched in financial terms—this is about how much money we can spend and "I can outspend you" as opposed to actually dealing with the issue of mental health and trying to give achieve a good outcome. The next one I come to is around improving child wellbeing. So here we are. We've got the word "wellbeing" all through these and what is the performance around improving the issue of child wellbeing in New Zealand? A critical issue—everyone in this House is absolutely focused on achieving it and making sure our kids are safer. If I talk to my esteemed colleague the Hon Louise Upston and if she was to get up and start talking about the objectives—Hon Louise Upston: Seven out of nine going backwards.ANDREW BAYLY: Seven out of nine performance indicators—but again what's put in here? Again "Specialist services as part of a $320m package to address family and sexual violence"—there's one right—but actually nothing about the key result area that you want to achieve. These are all about Government spending money and making us sound like we're great stuff but we are more interested—and when I say "we" I'm saying that this side the Opposition National Party—in actually measuring and achieving outcomes with key result areas. That's missing from the Wellbeing Budget. That if anything describes why we're so implacably opposed to this this bill because it doesn't actually achieve anything. It is nice to have. It's a wonderful concept but as I've said before it provides a warm glow of incompetence."