Patterson MarkMARK PATTERSON (NZ First): New Zealand First rises to support this bill because it does mean the Government will have to take in a broader suite of parameters in the construction of its Budget process and there is more transparency in the accounting around that broader suite of measures as has been acknowledged by the previous two speakers. GDP is a blunt tool and even the gentleman that devised it and came up with the model warned against using it too prescriptively. And we've seen recently in the past in terms of GDP when we've had quite high GDP but we've had rising inequality and when we had what was called a rock star economy we had so many people falling out the bottom. So we have seen first-hand in very recent times where a myopic focus on GDP has not served us well as a country. So it does give more accountability on things like environmental outcomes social outcomes and cultural measures. We have seen in the past—not just the recent past but deep dark in the past—that the Nordmeyer Budget the Black Budget of 1957 I think was a famous Budget. I don't think even Winston was in the House then but it endures today as a—SPEAKER: Order! One the year is wrong and two the member shouldn't refer to his leader that way.MARK PATTERSON: OK. The Rt Hon Winston Peters wasn't in the House—that could've been a career-limiting slip. Thank you for pulling me up Mr Speaker. And we saw of course Ruth Richardson's mother of all Budgets" in 1991 and I think that under these parameters it would be much more difficult for future Governments to take that short-term slash-and-burn type of mentality. And of course the Key Government also has a myopic focus on getting back to surplus that did see us sweat assets. We had a rising population and investment into our public services being either frozen or shrunk in many cases or certainly not growing at the level the population was and as I said before many people were falling behind. It's a mess that we've had to clean up to a larger degree.I think the environment is conducive to bringing this in because we are running up in the response to COVID a significant debt—by international standards still relatively moderate—from where we've come from. So the environment is there if a future Government takes a slash-and-burn approach should they feel that was their priority at the time and this overarching framework will put some checks and balance around that. It will make them report and take into account this wider suite of measures. As the Minister said there's been some criticism from the Opposition about not codifying what those specific targets might be but it is up to future Governments to set their own targets. We're going with the Living Standards Framework that was set up under the previous Government and we're evolving them and using them as a measure and I think that's appropriate but future Governments may wish to move on that. But they will have to report on outcomes.So this is modern and in many cases world-leading as we've heard before—although it's not really. I mean I think Governments are lagging in this respect. If you look at the commercial world it's pretty standard for leading companies to report on a triple bottom line. So it is the way that the world is going and it's only right and proper that Governments that have such a wide-reaching effect on the health and living standards of a nation should do the same.So I commend Minister Robertson. This will be an enduring measure that will be part of his legacy and I know he has long championed this. I commend the Finance and Expenditure Committee for working through this and New Zealand First will support it in the House. I think when this Government was formed the Rt Hon Winston Peters talked about returning the human face of capitalism and this bill takes us exactly in that direction. Thank you."