O'Connor SimonSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): Thank you very much Mr Chair. I think actually it's twofold on the member who has just resumed his seat Michael Wood that one they're trying to shut down this discussion before we've even had a second speech and secondly more words were uttered by that member who stood up to ask that the question be put than actual changes in the agreement. So thank you for the symbolism there.In terms of these title and commencement clauses 1 to 3 I will try to keep my comments relatively brief. I'm not actually going to be proposing a whole lot of name changes. But the primary purpose is that actually the name change is not the substantial aspect. Really it's symbolic if you will—and I know other members have pointed out that simply changing the name has not materially changed what was once known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). But I do want to acknowledge all those who have been part of this process from the naming to the 6000-plus pages. Although as the Minister in the chair Damien O'Connor has pointed out—is it 30 sections or 30 parts? The count's still continuing.But a number of people have been involved in pulling this agreement together: obviously the Ministers who took the nominal lead from Tim Groser—Todd McClay and now the Hon David Parker. They need to be acknowledged. But I suppose in some ways in entitling this bill and talking to it—acknowledgment to all the officials the advisers and the negotiators who put in the hard yards and then I would suggest perhaps have to put down some patience when we go through this rightful theatre in the Chamber.There have not been substantial changes. There have been side letters which are important obviously in continuing the Government's intention and that's their full right. But why I wanted to take this call—and I don't intend to introduce those titles but those really particular elements that have been of concern to people remain protected and always were protected. So Pharmac and the Treaty of Waitangi were two that were quite often mentioned and perhaps particularly for the likes of the Green Party which I'd suggest at times have created mischief around this along with some of the protest groups—Pharmac remains protected. Pharmac was always protected. Those that we negotiated with did understand or came to understand the model that we operate and so there were no further protections I would suggest. In terms of the Treaty of Waitangi the sovereign right of this realm to actually work with indigenous people to be a cosignatory in that agreement was never under threat. So to that end it's a good agreement and it was a good agreement when it was the TPP.It's excellent that the commencement date is the date after Royal assent. There is no need now that we've reached this point to slow things down I would suggest any further. Again without belabouring the point the agreement itself the trade treaty has been ratified and this is the domestic legislation to bring it into effect. There is no need to delay it any further and it would be my hope here in clause 2 that once this particular bill does become law through Royal assent at the hand of the viceregal representative we are able to move very swiftly into that which is clause 2 around the actual commencement—that's obviously up to the Minister or Ministers to decide. In terms then of any other titular changes it's all fairly minor.So as I say in order to actually give some seriousness to this I think I'm not going to try to play around with the words—or rather the two letters C" and "P"—but rather to again acknowledge the work that's been done to get us this far; to acknowledge that in this side's view there have not been the substantial changes that have been often put forward in discussions; and again to emphasise that those really important aspects to New Zealand I think have always been recognised by our negotiators particularly that around the Treaty of Waitangi and Pharmac. So I'll end my contribution there if I might."