Scott AlastairALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa): I rise as a member of the Finance and Expenditure Committee. I would like to make a few comments this afternoon on the prudent and measured expenditure that is in these Estimates. We talk about results rather than the amount of money we spend. So we are talking about results in terms of low crime rates—the best in the last 30 years—higher employment and lower numbers of people not in education employment or training. Opposition members have spoken about real increases in the budgeted amounts and in some cases they are right. There have not been real increases in expenditure because as I say we are prudent about the amount of money we spend. On average we have been spending around $1.5 billion of new money in the last few years. On the other hand members opposite spent almost triple that over their last few years in Government. So again it is a demonstration of the measured expenditure the targeted expenditure that we focus on on this side of the House. Because our expenditure is targeted we focus on those most in need. That is important because if we focus on those who are most in need the incremental increase in productivity if you like is greatest for the person for the family and for the community and that improves the economy at a household level. It increases the productivity of that household and that community. It is contributing to the surpluses that we are seeing. There is a modest expectation of a surplus this year and the following year and of growing surpluses down the track. We focus on those who are most in need—and we have had discussion at the select committee around the balance sheet—and on those million-dollar kids. So if we can spend a dollar today to improve the productivity if you like of that individual then that has flow-on effects. It has ripple-down effects. And it will save the taxpayer at the end of the day if we can keep one of the million-dollar kids out of the system out of the social welfare loop out of prison and away from Child Youth and Family. That saves the taxpayer a million bucks. So we are not talking just about surpluses. We are not talking just about short-term costs and revenues. We are talking about the long-term balance sheet effect that this Budget will have in the future and that is important. If we can manage the balance sheet appropriately we can decrease the pressure that would have been on the taxpayer of the future. These are uncertain times in the financial world. We have had Brexit. We are not talking just about the global financial crisis. We have recent issues of negative interest rates—something that is unheard of. You pay a bank to look after your money rather than receive interest on that money you deposit. So we are dealing with extremely unusual circumstances. We are talking about negative interest rates. We are talking about the possibility of deflation—importing deflation. But thankfully this economy is a robust economy. This economy has greater flexibility and resilience than ever before. This economy has people who understand the economies of the world. They understand the situation they are in and they understand the need for prudent expenditure on their behalf by the Government. The projections going forward are very conservative. The surpluses that are projected are very conservative. It is expected for example that there will be a relatively rapid decrease in net immigration from around 70000 which we have today to around 12000 in only 3 years' time. That net immigration is a nice problem to have. It is talked about as a problem by the Opposition but it is a nice problem to have. So let us say that the Minister has a corner shop a dairy that sells a lamb chop a pint of milk and a bottle of wine and it is such good lamb and it is such fantastic milk and it is the best wine in the world that people come—