Falloon AndrewANDREW FALLOON (National—Rangitata): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. It's a pleasure this afternoon to be taking a call on these regulatory systems amendment bills' first readings. I do want to say though it does feel a little bit like Groundhog Day—just a little bit like Groundhog Day. I guess the reason behind that is this is No. 2. The reason for that is of course back in September when we tried to initially discuss this legislation no Minister would turn up. So I just want to congratulate the Government on having a Minister in the House who can take a call. In fact several Ministers this afternoon have been able to take calls and so well done to them.I'm pleased the Government has seen fit to progress this legislation now because as has been said by all sides of the House it is a good tidy-up piece of legislation. There are some common-sense changes in here and I just want to run through a few of those—in particular in relation to the Regulatory Systems (Economic Development) Amendment (No 2) Bill which as the Minister has said will be coming to the hard-working Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee.I just want to run through some of these changes. One of them is in relation to the Companies Act 1993. What that will do is it will allow documents to be sent by email which is not a particularly controversial change I would've thought and certainly if it's not bringing us into the 21st century it's certainly bringing us into the 20th century and is obviously a very worthy change. There's also some other amendments in that bill. One of them is to the Fair Trading Act 1986 which talks about clarifying that it is goods that must comply with the standard rather than requiring the person supplying the goods to comply and that simply aligns with legislation to how the courts are already interpreting the Act and so again is a worthy change.My colleague Gerry Brownlee earlier spoke about the geographical indicators Act or the Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Act of 2006 and I think that is a very important piece of legislation. The reason for that is New Zealand is a very small country. We operate in a wide range of niche areas and so if you look at some of the products we produce whether they be our wine whether they be some of the produce that we produce in the electorate I serve Rangitata it's a good thing that we can distinguish and make sure that we can put forward our best foot on the world stage and when it comes to wine for example clarify that a bottle of wine comes from Central Otago rather than perhaps other parts of Otago. So the legislation—or this bill I should say—makes some good changes to that legislation.There's also a series of changes to the Insolvency Act 2006 the most important of which is that it requires a bankrupt to obtain consent to work for a relative regardless of whether or not they're being rewarded for that work at all and I think that's an important change because certainly as an electorate MP—and I'm sure members all around the place will have heard of cases in their electorates where unfortunately people who have become bankrupt go off and work in the same company that they essentially worked for before after they've perhaps passed ownership to a family member and they've continued to work in what should be outside the terms of their bankruptcy. So I think that is a very good change and there's also a similar amendment to the Limited Partnerships Act of 2008 which makes clear that the changes will prohibit a bankrupt from directly or indirectly being concerned or taking part in the management of a company again. I think that is a very sensible and straightforward change. The bill also makes some changes to the Plant Variety Rights Act 1987 to allow for an address for service to be provided in either New Zealand and Australia. I think that's a sensible change because we're just approaching 36 years since the Closer Economic Relations agreement was signed between Australia and New Zealand and this is just another step I guess in making sure that there's no disincentive to being based in either Australia or New Zealand and just making it easier for companies to operate on both sides of the Tasman.There's also an important change to the Weights and Measures Act of 1987 which provides that offences relate to the goods sold and hired rather than just sold—so goods that are sold or hired. I think that's an important clarification because if you think about businesses in again I'm sure all parts of the country that operate—there's one in my electorate of Ashburton: Ashburton U Hire—this will give them clarification that they also operate within the Weights and Measures Act and obviously of course consumers as well.There is as has been said a couple of other pieces of legislation that are wrapped up in this which will go off to other select committees. I'm pleased that this one that I've been talking about will come to the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee. I look forward to going through it over the next few months and reporting it back to the House pretty quickly. Thank you.