Wood MichaelMICHAEL WOOD (Labour—Mt Roskill): Thank you Madam Chair. I'm very pleased to speak in the finance and Government administration sector of the annual review debate. I want to kick off just by acknowledging the work of select committee members across the committee on the two committees which make up the sector. On my own Finance and Expenditure Committee can I acknowledge especially Fletcher Tabuteau the deputy chair and the senior Opposition member who at the time of the annual review was the Hon Steven Joyce and who is now the Hon Amy Adams. It's a committee which deals with some crunchy issues but does tend to work together as constructively as the times allow. Can I also acknowledge the other chair of the Governance and Administration Committee in this debate Brett Hudson and as they say behind every successful man is a surprised woman the deputy chair of that committee Ginny Andersen as well. These committees cover a very wide array of the Government's activities. The finance committee of course covers fiscal and economic policy and revenue; the Governance and Administration Committee covers a huge range of areas—Parliament and legislative services the Prime Minister and Cabinet emergency management and local government.One thing that stuck out for me when I read my way through the annual reviews is the outstanding work of New Zealand's public services and public servants. I don't think in this House we often enough acknowledge that. In fact sometimes in this House we give them a good kicking because it's good on the political side but actually we're extraordinary blessed in this country by our non-corrupt highly professional good quality Public Service. One thing that absolutely stood out for me and this was in the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) annual review—Mr Hudson made some reference to this and it just spoke to me about the value of our public services—was commentary in the report about the New Zealand passport. It's something that we take for granted. It allows us visa-free access to I think something like 140 countries around the world. Here's why: because we have a passport that's made up of 140 different plates. They're held in secure vaulted sites. The passport itself undergoes major review every two years along with very regular changes. There are over 100 checks of individual pieces of data before any passport is issued—a highly complex system that sits behind something that New Zealanders draw enormous value out of and that's incredibly important for this committee to take account of.What was noted in that annual review and I think it's important for this Parliament to note is that if we expect those public services for the benefit of New Zealanders we do have to pay for them. It was noted in this annual review that the DIA has been working with basically flat revenue over the past eight years while it fulfils those very very complex tasks. I think this Parliament needs to take note of that. If we want the good quality public services we've got to put the funding in.In the time I have the other area that I really want to draw attention to came through in the annual review of Treasury and the Financial Statements of the Government of New Zealand. This section of the annual review refers to the development of the Living Standards Framework. This is going to be I think one of the major directions that the Government takes over the next few years and it was of significant interest to members on both sides of the committee. Treasury reported to us about their current work on the Living Standards Framework. It's not an entirely new concept; it's something Treasury has been developing for a number of years and what it's about is about saying that the quality of life for New Zealanders is measured in more than just a measurement of whether the Government reaches a fiscal surplus or a deficit and in more than the single figure of GDP growth.The quality of life for New Zealanders is about things like whether you can swim in your local river or stream about whether our kids are growing up in poverty or not and the way Treasury wants to measure these things is by looking at a broader range of capitals. Yes they say—and they confirmed this in the annual review—it's still really important to look at the fiscal bottom lines. It's still really important to run a tight ship and to have surpluses so that we can make the investments that we need and so that we're ready for the tough times. But that shouldn't be the only thing that we as Government and we as a Parliament look at. We should also be looking at the other capitals—the fiscal capitals the human capitals the social capitals and the natural capitals—because in the end those are the things that actually make life worth living and make this a good place for all New Zealanders which is what I know all members in this Parliament would want.So that was an area I just really wanted to draw attention to that is in the annual review of Treasury and the Financial Statements of the Government. It's a significant priority for the Government but I know from conversations on the committee that members across that committee really want to understand the potential benefits of the Living Standards Framework and to make sure that it is an effective tool to make sure that the Government and the Parliament are delivering for all New Zealanders.I think that the annual reviews that we have before us give real testament to the work of our Public Service and our public servants. They set out some of the key challenges for Government going forward and I look forward to the rest of this debate. Thank you Madam Chair.