Bayly AndrewANDREW BAYLY (National—Port Waikato): Thank you Madam Chair. Well I'm still waiting for the Minister to stand up and provide some support to his comments about the number of parties he believes have reached agreement between the tenant and the landlord because I think it's a pretty important question to be asked. It's great to be able to stand up and make claims like that in the Chamber but unless there is supporting documentation or whatever it'd be good to know what that is. Secondly the issue around how many tenants does he believe—or property agreements does he believe have the Auckland District Law Society 27.5 clause. Because I think that underpins a lot of what he's suggesting in this package. So I suppose as I've said before why has it taken so long to get to this point? But that's a separate issue. I think the big thing that most people find troublesome about the proposed solution that was offered last year but never put in place with what the Labour Government is doing now is it turns on this definition of fair proportion". I note that the Minister has said that there is an element that refers to revenue but a definition of fear and a perception of fear is always different between parties particularly if you've got two parties. And as my colleague Joseph Mooney quite rightly pointed out in some cases contrary to the view of certain Labour members and certainly Miss Genter—she expressed last night that all landlords are basically rich people and they can afford to do everything and by the way they should be shouldering the burden because they're making lots of money anyway. It sort of detracts from reality which is in many cases landlords do not have a lot of spare money. In fact a lot of commercial property is actually owned by mums and dads who are seeking to get their income for their superannuation or whatever and in many cases they actually have borrowings against it and they are financially constrained as much as anyone during these lockdowns that the Government is imposing on New Zealanders. So the definition of "fair proportion"—this is the issue because as I say what is fair? If a landlord has previously been very supportive—and I know that many landlords have where they've given vast discounts in the previous four lockdowns. And of course we're now into our fifth lockdown. What is it—73 days 74 days of the current lockdown? They may have given significant financial support to their tenants over the course of the last year and a half but this lockdown they may actually be in a situation where they cannot. Their bank's saying to them "Don't do it unless you want to mortgage up your house or whatever. We are worried about your income levels and we're simply not in that situation." Now we've got a Government who thinks "Oh don't worry about those arrangements at all being entered into. What we're going to do is we're going to go retrospective and just look at the current lockdown." And they go back to 28 August or whatever and say "Hey! Guys! You've got to re-negotiate something because you know we just think it's right." even though it does not take into account what's gone on for the last year and a half. This is why it's such a sloppy piece of lazy legislation that the Minister is proposing. So now you've got to debate what's fair—fair in the context of what we've done in the last 18 months fair in the context of what's happened on this last lockdown. So that's one issue. One is what's revenue? Revenue is one measure Minister but I know you're not from that background but actually the only thing that really counts in business is profit and cash and cash is probably the main one actually just to give them a bit of a helping hand. So talking about a loss of revenue—yes it's a good partial indicator. But what happens if you've got a large multinational who's renting a property from a small mum and dad investor and their view on the decline on their revenue is quite strident? And actually they're saying "Well we've lost 25 percent" or whatever because there's no indication in the legislation "We've lost 25 percent so therefore we should have a 25 percent decline in our rent." That sounds fair doesn't it? Actually 25 percent reduction may actually not be in that situation because they have been able to reduce their staff or whatever to try and deal with the issue. So this issue about fairness is one that strikes to the core of it. I want to talk about a situation—I actually modelled this. This is a hairdresser in Papakura. I can tell you that during the last lockdowns—[Time expired]"