The Treasury shot down a bid to save kiwis. Photo / File
The Treasury shot down a bid to save kiwis. Photo / File
Six weeks after the Budget, the Treasury has released a stack of documents showing how the decisions were made. The papers include advice from department officials and Treasury, as well as Cabinet papers. Here is a summary of some of the information that was unveiled.
Boot camps
The Government has quietly scaled back boot camps for young beneficiaries and Treasury has advised they should be scrapped altogether because they are not effective.
In the Budget, the Government provided $3.9 million funding for each of the next four years for 800 people to take the course each year - well down on the almost 2000 a year funded to do the course after National expanded it in 2010 and 2011. A spokeswoman for Social Development Minister Anne Tolley said the rise then was because of high youth unemployment during the financial crisis.
By contrast, Treasury said the Youth Guarantee scheme was working well and should be given priority for any extra funding. For that the Government covers the fees for school dropouts aged between 16 and 18 to train at places such as polytechnics.
Unemployed youth can also choose to take part in the six-week limited service volunteer (LSV) courses run by the army. In 2012 Ms Bennett had to defend the courses after Labour's Jacinda Ardern found more than 1000 of the 1300 participants had dropped out or were still on a benefit three months later. Prime Minister John Key and Ms Bennett have both made appeals to employers to take on LSV graduates in the past.
The army also runs three-month Military Activity Camp boot camps for serious young offenders, whom Prime Minister John Key described as "ticking time bombs" in 2009.
Saving kiwis
The Treasury shot down a bid to save kiwis, saying a project to protect the country's national symbol was "not aligned with overall Government priorities".
The Government went ahead anyway, boosting funding for the "Save Our Iconic Kiwi" project in this year's Budget.
Although Treasury supported several other conservation projects, it said the Department of Conservation (DoC) initiative "to reverse decline and secure an increase in kiwi numbers and distribution" was a dud.
Last month, a report from the local government and environment committee said there were fewer than 70,000 kiwi left in the wild, with the population declining by 2 per cent a year due to predation.
Minister of Conservation Maggie Barry told the parliamentary committee the $11.2 million project would focus on growing the kiwi population to a sustainable level through careful monitoring programmes and predator extermination.
New schools
Treasury officials wanted to put off building new schools to save money despite recognising the huge demand in Auckland and Christchurch. Pre-Budget documents show Treasury put forward an alternative proposal on school property, which included a lower amount for "demand pressures" than bid for by Education Ministers Hekia Parata and Nikki Kaye.
In a separate document, Treasury said part of its reservations were due to forecasting uncertainties, leading to concerns about allocating such large amounts of cash.
Education Ministers Hekia Parata and Nikki Kaye
"We note that Auckland has strong growth projections and the Government has a willingness to get ahead of the demand curve, however we believe that there is a risk that this growth may manifest in different sub-regions, as experienced with Rolleston," it said. Plans for a secondary school in Rolleston, Christchurch, had to be expanded because of population growth.
Treasury identified "the increasing pace and scale of major redevelopments" as a risk, warning the Ministry of Education might not have the capacity to deliver work programmes both across New Zealand and in Christchurch.
It noted there might be a lack of market capacity to build so many new schools, with high demand in Auckland and Christchurch for competing resources.
The Government allocated $244 million in the Budget on capital expenditure for new schools, kura and classrooms. Those included four new schools in Hamilton, Christchurch, and two primary schools in Auckland. During the election campaign, National said it would meet population growth with $350 million in funding for new classrooms and schools.
Solo parents
The Government considered making solo parents return to fulltime work when their youngest child was 12, instead of 14, but decided against it.
Budget papers also show it was former Social Development Minister Paula Bennett's idea to require solo parents to re-apply for their benefits every year "to send a strong message that benefit receipt is expected to be temporary."
The Ministry of Social Development also advised that change would cost between $8 million and $11.5 million over four years to administer.
The papers show the Government started work on the centrepiece of its Budget last August, a month before the election. That was a $790 million "child hardship" package aimed at low-income families. It included a $25 increase to core benefit rates for parents as well as $12.50 more a week for some on Working for Families.
However, the Government also required sole parents to re-apply for the benefit each year and to return to part time work when their youngest child turned 3 - down from 5 years old now. The Government did not go ahead with the idea of requiring parents to move into fulltime work when their youngest was 12, not 14, because 14 was the youngest a child could be left at home without supervision and officials pointed to inconclusive overseas evidence that mothers working could have adverse impacts on young teenagers.
The papers released show officials initially favoured boosting accommodation grants rather than increasing core benefit levels to help children living in hardship. They recommended increasing the accommodation supplement, extending Parental Tax Credits to beneficiary parents and lifting Working for Families for parents of children aged under 2. The latter two were scrapped because it would have been too expensive and meant families would face an income drop after their children turned 2. The papers show the initial package in March, after the Government decided to go ahead with benefit increases, was worth almost $100 million more than the $790 million package eventually decided on.
Surplus land sales
The Government scrambled together its controversial plan to sell surplus land in Auckland to developers at the last minute, the Budget documents show. The policy was developed in such a rush that it was still being developed when Cabinet signed off the Budget package in April.
Treasury officials were uncertain about the amount of crown land available for affordable housing developments, saying 100ha was zoned residential but could also be subject to right of first refusal rules or offer-back provisions. After further advice from officials, Housing Minister Nick Smith revealed on Budget day that up to 500ha of land could be available for development. The rushed policy is being challenged in court by Auckland iwi.
In December, Treasury officials wanted to give district health boards an increase of $250 million in the May Budget. Health Ministry officials wanted the increase to be $320 million.
Even the ministry proposal "would require DHBs to make reprioritisation and efficiency savings of $121 million (1.1 per cent)", says a Cabinet committee paper signed by Health Minister Jonathan Coleman.
Cabinet agreed to give DHBs a pre-Budget funding "signal" of $275 million, but in April, Dr Coleman and Finance Minister Bill English agreed to seek an extra $25 million.
In his Budget press statement, Dr Coleman said "District health boards will have around $320 million available next year for extra services and to help meet cost pressures and population changes."
Treasury officials urged Associate Finance Minister Paula Bennett to remind Dr Coleman of the need to "review options and trade-offs to determine an appropriate Budget package". They said she could also say: "You understand that the MoH [ministry] has submitted a significant number of Budget initiatives (at last count 45) and given fiscal pressures this is unrealistic."
- Kirsty Johnston, Claire Trevett, John Weekes, Isaac Davison
