Robertson GrantHon GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour): Madam Chair I was just hoping that the Minister might get up and answer those two questions from my colleague. My contribution is actually to extend out the second set of those questions which is a very specific set of questions around the calculation and the methodology. So just to work our way through that obviously the change that's being made—proposed by the Government which clearly on this side of the House we do not support—is to return to the adjustment via the Consumers Price Index (CPI). So just so we've got everything really clear on the table my first question is: is that CPI as calculated by Statistics New Zealand? I know that there is a clause potentially here in the bill for that to be changed to another measure as indicated by the Government Statistician if CPI were not to exist. But I want to be really clear that it is CPI as defined by Statistics New Zealand and to be really clear on what date CPI is being used for each year.Because what has traditionally happened is we've tended to use perhaps a December annual number or the December quarter number. This is extremely important because it does dictate where those on the lowest incomes in New Zealand are going to find themselves when this change goes through. The Minister has in the House stood up and told us that they will be better off this year. We know they won't be better off in the future—in fact they'll be demonstrably far worse off in the future—but we can't make those calculations accurately unless we have an understanding (a) that it is CPI (b) what period of time that is for and then we move to the ability to make an accurate comparison.Now building on what my colleague Carmel Sepuloni said my understanding is that the figure that was being used with the change that our previous Government made was a figure on net of tax and ACC earner levies the average ordinary time weekly earnings. That was the figure. Now the issue that my colleague Carmel Sepuloni has raised is in the supplementary analysis report (SAR) it mentions that we would find out on 7 February what the net average wage increase was.So my questions for the Minister here are: can she please clarify for the House that what I have said is correct—that the calculation that has been used for the last few years by the previous Government is this one of net of tax and ACC earner levy the average ordinary time weekly earnings? If that's true what is that figure now in turn? So we can make that direct comparison between the CPI and what we have previously used. Then if it's not what is being used here?I do suspect—and I'm not particularly having a go at the Minister about this particular issue because it's actually quite complicated—what's in the SAR might not be exactly right. Because what it does is it uses the term net average wage growth" as the comparator with what CPI is. I don't actually think that's the calculation that we've been using up to now because it misses out this question of being net of tax and the ACC earner levy.This is important. I know it sounds like a matter of detail but that's what the committee of the whole House stage is for: to be able to identify this. Because we have a table on page 4 of the supplementary—well it's actually called the "regulatory impact statement" but it's actually a supplementary analysis report which would purport that in the year to April 2024 CPI was projected to be 5.13 percent. It actually didn't turn out to be that; it turned out to be 4.7 and then a net average wage growth figure of 4.74 percent. Now if that had been the case we're right at the margins of the difference. Then of course we see the projections for the later years where inflation comes down. Bear in mind that's a goal of the Government—to bring inflation down—and so therefore wage growth significantly outstrips CPI in those later years.But you know that's the political argument which we've been hearing in the first two readings. I now want us to get into the technical side of this so that all New Zealanders are absolutely clear about the comparison here and the position that will leave people in. So I note for the Minister she may need to get some advice on this but it is a very important matter and I would appreciate her answers to those questions."