Mallard Trevor: Third Readings —Text is subject to correctionMallard Trevor: Third Readings —[Sitting date: 19 November 2013. Volume:695;Page:15047. Text is subject to correction.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): Well Mr Assistant Speaker I have been away for some time but I am not sure that that should stop you recognising me. I do want to react to the member opposite the Hon Chester Borrows. I think that an attack on Gerry Brownlee is hardly showing divisions opposite. We know that they do not like Gerry Brownlee but when we agree with them they should not say that that indicates a lack of unity on the part of the Labour Party. That is pretty obvious.But there has been one thing that has been made absolutely obvious by the contribution of the Minister in charge of this legislation the Associate Minister of Justice and that is that Tim Groser is staying in the country for the Christmas holidays. Tim Groser is staying in the country for the Christmas holidays because we have the minibar amendment which makes it legal to take alcohol out of the minibars between 4 and 8 in the morning. If anyone has a particular interest in that area—Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is going very well but I think that sort of comment is likely to lead to disruption. That is a slur on a member’s character and I take offence.Hon TREVOR MALLARD: Can I speak to the point of order?The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): You most certainly may.Hon TREVOR MALLARD: It is a matter of fact—Mr Groser’s minibar habit. It is a matter that is recorded and reported to the New Zealand public every 3 months. It is outrageous and referring to it should not be stopped.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Can I just say that it is usually up to an individual member to take objection. In this case it would be Mr Groser. I call the Hon Trevor Mallard but ask him—Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. As I say it is going well. That sort of personal attack on a member who cannot be here to defend himself is I think unwarranted and will lead to disruption. If Mr Mallard wishes to go and impugn Mr Groser’s character outside the House I would wish him to do that. But the last time he did that he came off pretty poorly.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Thank you Mr Coleman. It is not actually leading to disorder at the present stage.Hon TREVOR MALLARD: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In some ways I want to agree with the point that my colleague opposite just made. I think for you to rule that an absent member should take a point of order is something that is slightly bizarre. I disagree on the facts as to whether what I said was out of order or not and I think you ruled appropriately there. But your subsequent ruling that it was up to someone who was not here to take a point of order is I think somewhat unusual.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Can I just say to members that all members are honourable and that is it. We refer to each other as honourable despite what we may think is otherwise and we call a member what we would want them and all of us to become. I caution the House. We tend to see the world as we are not as it is. I just ask members to be conscious of that because courtesy is contagious.Hon TREVOR MALLARD: I am going to go right back to where I started in reaction to members opposite and the indication from the Minister in charge of the bill that the urgent part of this was a Supplementary Order Paper to do with the Sale of Liquor Act the main import of which is that people do not have to go to people’s hotel rooms at 4 in the morning to lock the minibars in order to stop people serving them. The point that I did make is that there is on the record published by John Key as Minister responsible for Ministerial Services one person who uses minibars I think about as much as every other Minister combined. That is Tim Groser.Hon Chester Borrows: And a member of the Opposition.Hon TREVOR MALLARD: Well that is exactly right. He has more than all Ministers and members of the Opposition combined. I agree with Chester Borrows on that. That is almost certainly the case. We are passing a clause that tends to indicate by its urgency that it is a matter of the Christmas holidays for the Minister concerned.Other than that there does not appear to be any urgency around the legislation. In actual fact that matter I am pretty sure could have been dealt with in a stand-alone bill that could go through all of its stages relatively quickly anyway. It did not really need to be part of a Statutes Amendment Bill. I think that when there is unanimity around a matter like that it might have in fact been more transparent to do it by that method.There have been a few areas that have come into this bill. There have been a couple of areas that have been knocked out of the bill. There has been an area that has been transferred to the Unit Titles Amendment Bill. But overall this is a relatively simple bill and one that deserves support.