Dean Jacqui; Rurawhe AdrianHon JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): Thank you Mr Speaker. Look I can't begin my speech without responding to the comments of the member who's just returned to her seat Anahila Kanongata'a-Suisuiki where she congratulated the Government for putting food into everybody's mouth who were in need during the lockdown period. Yes I congratulate the Government for stepping up in that regard but they weren't the only ones. They weren't the only people in New Zealand who were stepping up to help their fellow team of 5 million in New Zealand. Sure the Government did a great job during the lockdown. We totally support the vast majority of measures that the Government brought in in dealing with the health response and to a certain extent the social response particularly during level 3 and level 4 when people were in their homes and suffering significant hardship.But it wasn't only the Government and the degree of hubris that we are now beginning to see coming from this coalition Government is breathless. The member earlier in the afternoon in this debate the Hon David Parker was fulsome in his praise for the finance Minister the Hon Grant Robertson with his visionary Budget and got himself quite worked up in describing the wonderful—the sheer wonderfulness of Grant Robertson. I could just see into his mind—and I could just see into his mind that he was going This man is superb! King Dick Seddon—no no that's a bit much. This man is superb!" And then he checked himself and went "Oh hang on a minute." Then he just stuck to "OK he was visionary." But I want to know from David Parker and I want to know from other members of this Government and Cabinet including Grant Robertson what is so visionary about spraying money around in a Budget? We all know that stimulating the economy via putting money into the system is what absolutely is needed.But I tell you what else is needed: a plan is needed. While this Government seems to have an unfailing focus on jobs—which is great—what about business? What about small business? What about those small businesses who are the very ones who employ the workers? Please explain to me at some point during this debate: what is the point of giving the wage subsidy to your employees? It's a good thing; we support it but if you don't support the small businesses themselves when that support runs out so does the business.So we are waiting. We are teetering on the edge of the cliff in New Zealand today. We are in this false situation where we have workers in small businesses and large businesses. They are impacted in this crisis as well. We have all of those workers with the subsidy—a good thing—but as we know when that subsidy goes in the absence of any other meaningful support not for the workers but for those employers and the businesses then it will all collapse around the Government. They know it. They absolutely know that. And I'm yet to see any meaningful policy coming from this Government any meaningful plan coming from this Government which is going to address that very moment when the wage subsidy runs out and suddenly employers go "I can't make this work anymore; I simply can't make this work."All of the measures put in by this Government and I do wish the Prime Minister had been able to explain today in answer to questions from our leader just how those measures to support small businesses were going to work because I didn't see any coherent arguments or answers from the Prime Minister because it's blindingly obvious we are all connected to small businesses. It is blindingly obvious that if you don't have—Hon Member: We are.Hon JACQUI DEAN: Yes we are. If you don't have customers coming through the door if you don't have orders coming through your website well what is the point of a wage subsidy? Because when that runs out you do not have the means to pay them.So I want to talk for a moment about conservation in New Zealand because it was another example of spray the money around make jobs for people but where is the plan behind it? I've read the Budget documents. I've read the press releases. I certainly acknowledge that spending money on all of those things in the conservation portfolio that we all hold dear addressing pest control supporting Predator Free 2050 Jobs for Nature jobs on private and conservation land: all good stuff. All good stuff. But here are some questions I will be asking the Minister of Conservation in due course: where is the plan for all those jobs? There is a lot of money. Let's just talk about the Jobs for Nature fund; $200 million to fund jobs and create jobs. So these are new jobs we're talking about here: boosting predator control—wonderful; restoring wetlands—wonderful; regenerating planting and improving tracks—it's what we all want; huts and other recreational visitor assets on public conservation land. How are they going to do that? How are they going to do that in Fiordland or Otago and on the West Coast—where formerly there was very low unemployment but particularly in Otago where there has been a mass loss of jobs but a lot of those people in those jobs are in hospitality or tourism—and working in areas that are totally unrelated. The skill set is totally unrelated to what is required to working in the outdoors and in nature. How are they going to make that transition? Is the Government going to provide pastoral care for those people? Who are the agencies that are going to be delivering these projects? And what is the strategy between the Department of Conservation and those other agencies to make sure that not only do we get the outcomes that we need in the environment—and I've just listed them—but how do we ensure that that $200 million fund for new jobs which I've just outlined how do we know that is going to provide value for money for New Zealand? Because we've got to keep a hold of quality expenditure. It is simply not good enough to keep spraying the money around our economy on make-work jobs without ensuring that that money is well spent is targeted and gets the outcomes for which it made the press release which sounded really good in the first place. It's easy to do a press release. It's fabulous but delivering is quite another matter and one only has to talk to Phil Twyford to see that non-delivery is one of the hallmarks—and I'm talking KiwiBuild here—of this Government and I could go on—light rail to Auckland Airport—but I digress. There's another thing I want to ask—and I will be asking—the Minister and I expect some good answers. The question is: what happened to that $60 million shortfall in her funding through this Budget which was caused by lost concessions due to the lockdown of course—members will remember that—and which is exacerbated by no more coming no more visitor levy coming across the border? So there's a $60 million shortfall. Where does that appear in her Budget documents because I can't find it and is some of that funding—that funding announced in the Budget—going to plug that gap to plug that hole? It's not immediately apparent but it is incredibly important because the public needs to know that the money that the Government allocates through the Budget it's not the Government's money—like they seem to think that they are the providers of all things good in New Zealand. It's not their money; it is taxpayer money.And here's another thing I want to ask the Minister of Conservation and believe that New Zealand needs an explanation for: what happened to that promise that she made midway through the lockdown that she would be providing financial relief to people who had concessions to hunt or to commercially operate or to undertake pest control on conservation land but couldn't? What happened to that relief? Because the stories I'm hearing are that far from concession fees being waived during that time they haven't. There have been promises made and I have heard one person with a concession flagging to me that they are not only not receiving any assistance but expecting an increase in the concession fee. Where is the thinking there? It's all very well creating jobs. It's all very well putting press releases around flagging support for predator control. We all support those things. But where is the Minister supporting those small businesses who not only rely on concessions for their very livelihoods and the livelihoods of their families but also make a contribution to biodiversity outcomes in New Zealand? What about them? Where is the mention of those people in New Zealand? Oh I'll tell the House the answer because I've been looking. There is no mention. This is a "scatter the money around" Budget. This is a "scatter the money around" in the conservation estate. It's OK. There's no plan though—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! The member's time has expired."