1 00:00:00,040 --> 00:00:02,600 Speaker 1: And so interesting development within the coalition years even First 2 00:00:02,640 --> 00:00:05,560 Speaker 1: and Act have rejected a cabinet proposal for an independent 3 00:00:05,600 --> 00:00:08,039 Speaker 1: costing agency. The idea was you wrap numbers around your 4 00:00:08,039 --> 00:00:10,880 Speaker 1: promises in an election. That's increased transparency and therefore the 5 00:00:10,880 --> 00:00:13,440 Speaker 1: fiscal whole drama of the past year or so doesn't happen. 6 00:00:13,640 --> 00:00:15,680 Speaker 1: Stephen Joyce has been there, done that form of Finance 7 00:00:15,680 --> 00:00:18,720 Speaker 1: minister is with this morning to you Monnie, Mike, call 8 00:00:18,840 --> 00:00:20,919 Speaker 1: you very well. And so back to twenty sixteen, this 9 00:00:21,000 --> 00:00:23,520 Speaker 1: was a Labour Green's idea that Simon Bridges rejected. So 10 00:00:23,640 --> 00:00:25,400 Speaker 1: you know of it. Would you have backed it? Is 11 00:00:25,400 --> 00:00:26,319 Speaker 1: it a good idea or not? 12 00:00:29,080 --> 00:00:31,320 Speaker 2: It could be helpful in someway. It's important to note 13 00:00:31,320 --> 00:00:33,239 Speaker 2: I think that this idea is a bit different to that. 14 00:00:33,280 --> 00:00:37,920 Speaker 2: I mean, it's the same bucket. But what the Finance 15 00:00:37,960 --> 00:00:41,879 Speaker 2: Minister's proposing is to cost individual policies at the request 16 00:00:42,040 --> 00:00:45,040 Speaker 2: of the parties involved, which I think does deal with 17 00:00:45,120 --> 00:00:48,559 Speaker 2: a problem that happens when you're in opposition is that 18 00:00:48,600 --> 00:00:51,919 Speaker 2: you don't have access to the information, so you have 19 00:00:51,960 --> 00:00:56,840 Speaker 2: to go chasing around oias and parliamentary questions to try 20 00:00:56,880 --> 00:01:00,160 Speaker 2: and get enough information to build a policy where which 21 00:01:00,640 --> 00:01:02,520 Speaker 2: stands scrutiny when it gets out in the public, and 22 00:01:02,800 --> 00:01:04,240 Speaker 2: it's a lot of fun for the government of the 23 00:01:04,280 --> 00:01:06,479 Speaker 2: day to try and withhold all that information and then 24 00:01:06,520 --> 00:01:11,360 Speaker 2: go ah, which ridiculously costed policy, and so that would 25 00:01:11,360 --> 00:01:13,080 Speaker 2: help with that. But it's a bit different to what 26 00:01:13,240 --> 00:01:16,000 Speaker 2: was being proposed by Laboring the Greens back then, because 27 00:01:16,000 --> 00:01:21,039 Speaker 2: they wanted to cost the party's fiscal policies. Of course, 28 00:01:21,080 --> 00:01:24,800 Speaker 2: we had an experience about that in twenty seventeen which 29 00:01:24,840 --> 00:01:29,839 Speaker 2: I was involved in with that fiscal whole, and Labor 30 00:01:29,880 --> 00:01:33,280 Speaker 2: came out with some numbers and I bagged them for 31 00:01:33,400 --> 00:01:36,959 Speaker 2: being about twelve billion short. I got bagged in turn. 32 00:01:37,480 --> 00:01:38,880 Speaker 2: But that's politics. I think. 33 00:01:39,040 --> 00:01:40,720 Speaker 1: I think it turned out to be right, though, didn't 34 00:01:40,720 --> 00:01:41,200 Speaker 1: you Stephen? 35 00:01:41,880 --> 00:01:44,760 Speaker 2: It turned out to be too conservative, Mike. It was 36 00:01:44,840 --> 00:01:47,680 Speaker 2: like you know, in hindsight, it was about twenty billion 37 00:01:47,680 --> 00:01:52,560 Speaker 2: months that actually spent all the money. But the difficulty 38 00:01:52,680 --> 00:01:56,440 Speaker 2: was the thing that was proposed back then is it 39 00:01:56,520 --> 00:02:00,440 Speaker 2: just brings whatever it is of Parliamentary Budget Office or 40 00:02:00,440 --> 00:02:03,120 Speaker 2: whatever you want to call it into the debate and 41 00:02:03,200 --> 00:02:06,440 Speaker 2: nobody internationally when it happens, nobody still accept it. It's 42 00:02:06,440 --> 00:02:09,640 Speaker 2: just a different stage of the argument, and ultimately the 43 00:02:09,639 --> 00:02:11,840 Speaker 2: public just has to form a view whether they trust 44 00:02:12,280 --> 00:02:15,720 Speaker 2: individuals to spend more or less. But this particular proposal, 45 00:02:16,040 --> 00:02:17,959 Speaker 2: as I say, it was a lot smaller, about a 46 00:02:18,040 --> 00:02:23,360 Speaker 2: million dollars. The Public Service Commission was going to supervise 47 00:02:23,400 --> 00:02:26,800 Speaker 2: it. It was literally at the party's request for them to 48 00:02:26,840 --> 00:02:29,440 Speaker 2: be able to get some information. But yeah, obviously coalition 49 00:02:29,520 --> 00:02:32,080 Speaker 2: politics the other two didn't want to do it. 50 00:02:32,160 --> 00:02:34,240 Speaker 1: Yeah, they don't. And do they look dodgy and not 51 00:02:34,280 --> 00:02:36,320 Speaker 1: wanting to do it or are their arguments around you 52 00:02:36,320 --> 00:02:38,840 Speaker 1: can get the numbers anyway, We've had alternative budgets and 53 00:02:38,880 --> 00:02:40,280 Speaker 1: we don't have the money to spend on this sort 54 00:02:40,280 --> 00:02:42,600 Speaker 1: of stuff. Plus we don't trust public service all the time. 55 00:02:42,600 --> 00:02:43,880 Speaker 1: I mean, do they stack. 56 00:02:43,720 --> 00:02:48,880 Speaker 2: Up Well, I think they're they're entitled to those sort 57 00:02:48,880 --> 00:02:52,240 Speaker 2: of party positions, and you know they're just positioning with it. 58 00:02:52,240 --> 00:02:53,720 Speaker 2: Act says, oh, you know, we know about to do 59 00:02:53,840 --> 00:02:56,359 Speaker 2: numbers anyway, so we don't need that. And I think 60 00:02:56,360 --> 00:02:58,520 Speaker 2: New Zealand first just take a traditional approach to it, 61 00:02:58,560 --> 00:03:00,040 Speaker 2: and they just say, oh, we didn't have it the 62 00:03:00,120 --> 00:03:02,520 Speaker 2: last forty years, why do we need it now? So 63 00:03:02,560 --> 00:03:07,320 Speaker 2: all that sort of stuff, I think, Yeah, there is 64 00:03:07,360 --> 00:03:10,720 Speaker 2: some truth to that is that is it ultimately our 65 00:03:10,760 --> 00:03:12,520 Speaker 2: public servants don't get it right all the time, but 66 00:03:12,520 --> 00:03:14,120 Speaker 2: I tend to get it a little bit more right 67 00:03:14,160 --> 00:03:15,679 Speaker 2: than a lot of political parties. I mean, you just 68 00:03:15,720 --> 00:03:19,640 Speaker 2: sort of green stuff recently, and you know that's pretty 69 00:03:19,720 --> 00:03:23,239 Speaker 2: high in the sky and so it's a it would 70 00:03:23,280 --> 00:03:25,560 Speaker 2: be a contribution to the baby. But don't forget the 71 00:03:25,600 --> 00:03:28,000 Speaker 2: party that we've got. The costing would control whether it 72 00:03:28,040 --> 00:03:31,520 Speaker 2: was released, so they'd probably only release it if they 73 00:03:31,560 --> 00:03:35,120 Speaker 2: actually liked it. Otherwise they'd probably just come up with 74 00:03:35,120 --> 00:03:36,280 Speaker 2: their own numbers. Good stuff. 75 00:03:36,280 --> 00:03:38,240 Speaker 1: Always pleasure to have you on the program. Stephen Joyce, 76 00:03:38,240 --> 00:03:40,280 Speaker 1: former Finance Minister. And I don't say that because he's 77 00:03:40,280 --> 00:03:41,800 Speaker 1: the chym of the board. I say it because he's 78 00:03:41,800 --> 00:03:45,200 Speaker 1: a nice guy anyway. For more from the Mic Asking Breakfast, 79 00:03:45,360 --> 00:03:48,720 Speaker 1: listen live to news talks they'd be from six am weekdays, 80 00:03:48,920 --> 00:03:50,960 Speaker 1: or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.