4. Question No. 4—FinanceHon AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn) to the Minister of FinanceQuestion No. 4—Finance4. Hon AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn) to the Minister of Finance: Are bids for Budget 2019 assessed using the Treasury's updated cost benefit analysis model?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): The short answer to the member's question is no because Treasury assesses bids using the template in the Budget guidance document that has been publicly released. The main elements taken into account in the assessment of bids briefly are priority alignment—i.e. alignment with the Budget 2019 priorities—the Government's Cabinet Priorities Committee priorities general Government direction outlined in the Speech from the Throne the coalition and confidence and supply agreements intervention logic implementation readiness and evaluation well-being analysis cost understanding—i.e. a cost breakdown and scaling options—and cross-agency or cross-portfolio collaboration. The explanation of the costs and benefits may be informed by a cost-benefit analysis performed by the agency making the bid which may be Treasury's cost-benefit analysis tool or another cost-benefit analysis.Hon Amy Adams: Is he really saying that what Treasury's website calls the Budget 2019 version of the cost-benefit analysis tool has no role in assessing Budget 2019 bids despite himself saying in the House yesterday that the framework which sets out the criteria for assessing well-being is being used to assess Budget bids?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I'll just repeat part of my original answer which is that a cost-benefit analysis approach is one input into the bid process.Hon Amy Adams: That's right. It's an input—it's used.Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The assessment—yes but the member is suggesting that that's how Budget bids are assessed. She knows that's not the case.SPEAKER: Careful.Hon Amy Adams: Well is the Minister aware that the Budget 2019 cost-benefit model which is used to assess well-being Budget bids has a significant error in it in which the dollar values assigned to a range of outcomes change significantly every time a user changes the order of the information such as by sorting it alphabetically?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The Budget analysis tool is an input to assessment. So the premise of the member's question is incorrect. The Budget analysis is one aspect; the Treasury Budget analysis tool is one tool. The member is misrepresenting the role of that analysis in Budget assessment.SPEAKER: No I'm going to ask the member to ask her question again.Hon Amy Adams: Ask it again? Certainly Mr Speaker. Is the Minister aware that the Budget 2019 cost-benefit model used as part of assessing well-being Budget bids has a significant error in it in which the dollar values assigned to a range of outcomes change significantly every time the user changes the order of the information such as putting them in alphabetical order?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I reject the premise in the first part of the member's question.Hon Amy Adams: Is the Minister aware that that error I've referred to in the Treasury Budget 2019 cost-benefit analysis tool means that changing just the order of the information can change the value given to say avoiding heart disease from either negative $8000 to zero dollars to positive $45000?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I imagine the spreadsheet is the same spreadsheet as what was used previously although there have been additional objectives added to it but the spreadsheet itself—I also probably assume that the member understands that the Minister of Finance doesn't do the spreadsheet work for Treasury.Hon Amy Adams: Why does he consider that moving house in the last 12 months amounts to $6000 of social benefit per person?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: It's not me that considers that. That is an assessment that has been made by Treasury working with other agencies such as Housing New Zealand. The member continues to conflate together different values. In fact Treasury themselves have said that the conflation that she's making is not a valid direct comparison.Hon Amy Adams: Doesn't having a Budget assessment tool that values not getting diabetes as only being worth half as much as chatting with your neighbour just prove that Auckland Action Against Poverty is absolutely right when they say that this Government has got its priorities wrong?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The member is comparing apples and oranges and she does know that because she has been a Minister. What the cost-benefit analysis tool does is in one area it looks at fiscal costs to the Government—the example she's given around diabetes—and in another area it looks at wider societal benefit. Treasury themselves have said that that is not a valid direct comparison.