Hudson Brett; Williams PotoBRETT HUDSON (National): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. It's a pleasure to rise in support of this bill and I'd like to thank the member Jan Logie who has just resumed her seat for lauding the previous Government. I take even greater satisfaction from the fact that she did so without realising that she had done that. This bill was introduced by the previous Government and has been returned from the Governance and Administration Committee with no changes as a result of policy shifts from the new Government. This bill is very much still the bill that was introduced by the previous National-led Government. So thank you. Thank you very much to the previous speaker for lauding it because it is a very worthy bill.One point I would make for members of this House is that we treasure the privileges we get as members of Parliament particularly the power and protection of parliamentary privilege. Yet I would urge members that we have a duty of care to each other to the House to our constitutional arrangements and to the public to make sure that we do not overuse or abuse the privileges that are granted us. We heard in the select committee a number of people make claims as to the influence of certain groups and individuals in the setting of the standard as related to methamphetamine testing. And in this House just a few minutes ago we had a Green MP once again charge that certain industry elements were exercising undue influence on that setting.Well I draw members' attention to a public document on 20 September of this year where the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment confirmed that they had undertaken a review of that process and it was not improperly influenced by any particular interests or views on the Standards Development Committee. So it is quite improper for a member in this House to make a claim which potentially may be seen by the people subject to those remarks as defamatory—that somehow individuals or businesses or an industry had an undue influence—when it has been reviewed and it has publicly been stated by officials of the Government that such influence did not exist. So I do caution members in these areas.But ultimately the bill that we are now bringing back to the House for further consideration remains a good bill. It is I think particularly worthy in its approach to balancing obligations of both tenants and landlords particularly as relates to damage to tenanted properties whether that damage is the result of carelessness or is wilful. It also strengthens understandings and both opens and has appropriate limitations on the sorts of redress around the occupancy of illegal dwellings.I acknowledge my colleague Andrew Bayly and the provisions from his member's bill around methamphetamine contamination which have been brought into this bill and broadened to be contamination" rather than specifically methamphetamine only. I think we have brought back a very strong and worthy bill for the House's consideration. And I'm particularly pleased to see that the bill particularly around contamination ensures that decisions that will be made by Order in Council will comply with other legislation other rules and particularly in line with the Standards and Accreditation Act 2015. That is enormously important with regard to contamination of rental properties. I commend this bill to the House.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): I understand this is a split call. Ginny Andersen—five minutes."