Scott AlastairALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa): Thank you Madam Chair. I'd like to respectfully disagree with Minister Nash and his comments on the Taxation (Neutralising Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) Bill. He was quite confused I think because on the one hand he said that we're always reviewing tax law but then he doesn't want to review this more formally—I acknowledge that. My point here is that this is a very complicated large piece of work—new work pioneering work leading-edge work. We have one of the world's experts in the field and I acknowledge that but then surely for that reason alone the fact that we are leading the world in this legislation and practice—surely that is a very good reason to make sure that we are checking ourselves more formally than just a business-as-usual review.The comments the Minister said—that business as usual was about reviewing stuff but then he didn't actually want to do a full-blown review a proper review because it took from one year to 24 months to use his words—far too long far too time-consuming too many resources applied to review this particular piece of legislation but then he's happy for the guys in the back office of IRD somewhere to review it anyway as business as usual. So it seems to me that those guys doing business as usual will not give enough attention will not give enough focus on the review of this leading legislation.So I do support the review of the legislation and I'm going to obviously support the amendment which talks about five years—the Minister has mentioned three a submitter has mentioned three years as an appropriate time. Maybe three years is an appropriate time but I think that there's always a danger in leading something and not sort of looking around from time to time because when you're at the front of a race you don't necessarily go in the right direction. When you're leading something you may go down a path that is actually the wrong path. I've done it—orienteering and cross-country running. It's much easier to be running following in second or third place with an eye to the leader with an eye to the frontrunners and then when it's appropriate to move from fifth place to fourth place to a bronze medal silver medal and potentially lead at a later date.There are a whole lot of risks associated with leading the pack. I can't remember the term but a fast follower" is always my preferred position if you like with any—whether it's a business or whether it's legislation; particularly relevant in this case where we're talking about legislation. So I would really encourage the Minister to rethink his view given that it is leading given that it is led by one of the world's experts given that it is new and because of those things it is high-risk by its very nature; plus all the complications that we all acknowledge—it's the most complicated complex tax legislation that Ms Turner the adviser to the committee had seen in 30 years.So surely we can't just say "Oh well that's pretty well done and dusted. Let's just review it as business as usual." I think we really need to take a good hard look at this just to see where the other countries are to look to our left and look to our right and just make sure that the guys in the other countries are following our practice—make sure that they're not going off down a different road and we find ourselves isolated with a piece of outdated legislation that will cost us a lot more in the long run if we do not review it. So there's the challenge: without review will this potentially cost the country more than we possibly could anticipate?So I encourage the Minister to rethink and perhaps make a few comments on the issues that I've raised in my contribution. Thank you."