O'Connor SimonSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): I'm sure the Minister the Hon Kris Faafoi is as thrilled as I that such a crowd has turned out and I'd probably like to—looking at the crowd—reassure the Minister that it's not a group of militant landlords but be careful when you leave afterwards. We're also very relieved to see that Jian Yang has actually made the House with five minutes to spare. My final gift to my friend and colleague is that I will conclude at 10 past 5. National continues to oppose this bill. That Minister will be no surprise to you. We remain disappointed that less than two hours ago the Supplementary Order Paper was tabled of which—in effect—the Parliament's had very little if any time to properly consider. I think unfortunately it is reflective of how this whole bill has gone. Minister our objections to this bill remain. Well fundamentally the Minister's drawn attention to so few bad behaving landlords or tenants" and that's right. But this bill effectively will touch on and affect every landlord and every tenant. In order to address the issues of a few this bill is going to cause problems for all. As I've noted in previous speeches—which is why I don't want to keep repeating things—in principle the National Party is one of private property rights. Landlords are not a social service; if they choose to be then all well and good but it should not be legislated. But practically the issue Minister is that in trying to help the tenants this bill is going to make their life a lot lot worse. As I've said I've explored this before—by reducing some of their freedoms which this bill is doing landlords will exit the market. They have as I've said mentioned to us in droves—even the New Zealand First Party acknowledged in their speech; I suspect they've had to swallow somewhat of a dead rat to vote for this. Landlords will leave the market. That will ultimately see rents increase. The idea that somehow purely limiting the landlords' increase to every 12 months won't cut it; they will simply double or take it even steeper as they so choose.The bill too doesn't go anywhere near to addressing antisocial behaviour. This side of the House Minister completely understands it's a small number of people but those who are landlords know that that action—those antisocial behaviours—is incredibly destructive. The idea that there should be three warnings over 90 days before one goes to a tenancy tribunal is completely unacceptable and that's before we've even gone into debates like methamphetamine and the rest.This is a badly construed bill. This is a bill that I would suggest is simply academic. It looks fantastic on paper I'm sure some tenants' groups think it's fantastic because it attempts to—or perhaps looks like it's going to—tilt things terribly in their favour. It will not. National therefore cannot support this. We are worried and concerned that as the weeks and months go by we will see fewer people in that private housing market. It's a problem the Government can ill afford—18000 families are already on the State house waiting list 18000 families. I fear—I fear—there'll be more.So ultimately the National Party opposes this. We will look to address this if we have the privilege of being in Government. I think fundamentally the message I want to end on is that this side of the House does hear the voice of tenants and we do hear the voice of landlords. We would be the party to put forward legislation which echoes those voices and not ideologies which ultimately harm the very people the Government claims they want to help."