Baillie ChrisCHRIS BAILLIE (ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of ACT to speak to the first reading of the Business Payment Practices Bill and I hate to disappoint Chlöe Swarbrick but we do think it's a silly bill that shouldn't go ahead. We oppose this bill for a number of reasons but the irony isn't lost that for the last five years business owners have been kicked in the teeth with a Minister who's been missing in action in the support of small business and this is obviously a virtue-signalling bill to try and show that they actually do care. But I think the Minister underestimates the intelligence of small-business owners and this token gesture won't fool them one little bit. If we look at the policy the purpose of the bill is to introduce a regime that brings transparency to business payment terms and practices and to incentivise larger businesses to improve their payment practices which all sounds great. In 2020 the Hon Stuart Nash said When small businesses are paid late many owners have to resort to personal savings or take out bank overdrafts to cover their business expenses." He just must have been asleep for the last couple of years because in the last three years businesses have had to borrow money whether it's off the Government's small-business loan scheme—which they have to pay back—borrow off friends downsize their business not pay themselves plead with landlords grovel with the IRD and be humiliated by banks and patronised by politicians in the Labour Party. They've had to scrape funds together in order to pay for the increases in the minimum wage the extra sick leave the statutory holidays—all pushed on to them over the last 2½ years while we're going through a COVID crisis. The Labour Government even wanted to get employers to pay for parents to go to their school interviews because they didn't think parents should waste their annual leave on their kids—it seems crazy. To pretend to care after all of this is pretty disingenuous. The legislation deals with those businesses with a revenue of over $33 million and they are required to disclose their payment of invoice practices twice a year including payment practices in relation to late and overdue payments and practices in relation to the terms that are set for those payments. The bill also provides a Minister with the ability to issue exemptions from the payment practices and knowing the bias of this Government I think this is a really scary clause. It also provides for penalties against those businesses that infringe. The bill provides for the appointment of a registrar to establish and maintain a register. Do we know how many more bureaucrats will be needed to be employed because of this? No doubt they will just go alongside the plain language police and they might share the same office. The justification for this legislation is confusing and the benefits are hard to ascertain. The Australian officials reported that the costs are hard to assess and that the benefits are likely to be hard to quantify. The policy is being implemented as it was in the Government's manifesto commitment and it wishes to implement an initiative that appears to support small businesses. But do we know what the initial costs involved with establishing a registrar are and what are the ongoing costs in the form of time resources dedicated to collating and then disclosing payment practices etc.? Little wonder the productivity in this country is so poor. The debate pack for the bill is a whole bunch of press releases—pretty repetitive—from the Minister that are designed to sound caring and are trying to convince business owners that he really does understand what they've gone through. He stated in September "Small businesses account for more than 97 per cent of all businesses in New Zealand. Late and overdue payments have a negative impact causing unnecessary stress and uncertainty"—unnecessary stress and uncertainty. The Minister's actions over the last couple of years have shown loud and clear that he really doesn't care. Most small businesses employ up to 20 people—the cafes the shops and the mechanics' bars just to name a few—and this bill won't affect that majority. I own a business and I understand creditors debtors cash flow and all the other things that go with it. None of my debtors have a revenue of over $33 million and it certainly counts me out. The bill tries to look as if the Government is tough on business. The supermarkets must be shaking in their boots after being allowed to trade all through COVID. Costco with a profit of billions receives accolades from Government Ministers while the small players have struggled to survive and many haven't. The rhetoric sounds good but the actual substance and actual practical use is predictably lacking. In fact the feedback I've had so far is that the Government departments are the main offenders that this legislation may affect. Maybe if they set the example for the large private sector companies they would naturally follow. ACT is the party for small businesses. This legislation is a solution looking for a problem. It's a cynical attempt to pretend to care when you're thinking up new ways to kick them when they're down and we oppose this bill. Thank you."