Connell Brian: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Connell Brian: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17862. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
BRIAN CONNELL (National—Rakaia 
 I start by thanking my senior whip for giving me the opportunity to come down here and debate this legislation this evening keeping me away from the media party and so looking after my health. I very much appreciate that. 
Today is something of a red-letter day because I find myself agreeing with something Michael Cullen said about polytechnics. I think he is right on this issue. I believe there is an issue relating to polytechnics as opposed to universities in terms of responsibility and accountability and how polytechnics spend their money. It is a matter of public record and concern that they have been engaged in activities that are less than satisfactory. I do not blame them for that. I am simply saying that a loophole has been exploited and on this issue I think the Minister is quite right in closing that loophole. 
Hon David Carter 
: It’s Government policy. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: I accept there is that responsibility but on this particular issue I think the Government is exercising good judgment in closing it down. I also think the House owes David McGee a debt of gratitude. The work he has done in bringing the legislation to a point where it is reasonably constructive and able to be debated rationally is something we should be grateful for. 
The issues that concern the National Party with some gravity are the appropriations. More than one class of output has been combined. On the face of it that seemed a reasonable idea. A lot of the issues that come before Ministers are minor. Therefore giving Ministers the flexibility to make judgments within their portfolios and within their budgeted expenditure is reasonably sensible. But the problem arises as to the quality of the Minister. Once a Minister is given the flexibility the range and the scope to deal with appropriations if he or she is not capable of dealing with that then we have an issue. I know there are some members of the Government who probably have no idea that the letters “bs” stand for “balance sheet”. I think their abilities to manage cash read cash-flow statements etc. are something that would concern most members of the business community if they realised just how big some of the budgets the Government has are. So anything that enables or allows that lack of accountability or control is something we simply cannot agree with. 
We are talking here about accountability for taxpayers’ money and we in the National Party take that extremely seriously. We have only to look at how some of the money in this country is being expended today to understand why we have concerns. We know that some members of the Government are very enthusiastic spenders. Today on television Dr Cullen waxed lyrical on how he intends to spend more rather than reduce taxation or costs and that gives rise to the types of concerns I am talking about. 
For example the National Party is concerned about the level of welfare expenditure in this country which is running at something like $20.5 million a day. We are experiencing the best of times yet the working-age population on welfare is bigger than the city of Christchurch. The Government in its latest Budget intends to extend that welfare trap to middle New Zealand as well which is why we do not support the legislation and why we need the ability to hold the Government accountable.