Simmonds PennyPENNY SIMMONDS (National—Invercargill): Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise to speak in support of the Accessibility for New Zealanders Bill being taken to the select committee. Currently New Zealand does not have comprehensive legislation to help identify remove and prevent barriers experienced by people with access needs. We know that as our population grows and people live longer the impact of accessibility barriers will only increase. We cannot afford as a society to let barriers in the built communications and digital worlds to prevent people from participating fully and equally in society.I am very pleased that the Minister has enabled a longer select committee process and I thank her and acknowledge her for that. I also want to acknowledge the Access Alliance group who were formed in February 2017. This was a diverse range of disability groups who came together to call for legislation that would enable people with disabilities to more actively participate in society and I believe we have some of those founding members of the Access Alliance here today and I want to acknowledge them for the wonderful work they have done. I think the founding members should be mentioned here today: the Association of Blind Citizens New Zealand CCS Disability Action Cerebral Palsy Society of New Zealand Deaf Aotearoa Disabled Persons Assembly (New Zealand) Kāpō Māori Aotearoa New Zealand Inc. National Foundation for Deaf & Hard of Hearing Blind Low Vision NZ Parents of Vision Impaired (NZ) Inc. People First Ngā Tāngata Tuatahi. They were the founding members of Access Alliance and many of the members of those groups have put in countless hours to get legislation through here. They will however be disappointed at how far this legislation goes and that is one of the main reasons that we are supporting this bill to select committee because we believe that members of a variety of advocacy groups and individuals from the disabled community should have the opportunity to present at the select committee to tell their stories to try and improve this legislation. The Access Alliance came up with 13 principles that they felt should form the core of the Act and I understand a number of them came from what is seen in Canada. So I think it is worth noting the things that the Access Alliance wanted to see in this legislation. First of all they wanted the Act to apply to all. They wanted it cover all persons with disabilities whether it be physical sensory cognitive communication or mental health - related and would include visible invisible permanent and episodic conditions. So they were very clear that they wanted it to be an all-encompassing piece of legislation. They wanted the Act to have time lines and I think they will be particularly disappointed around that not being part of the legislation. They wanted the Act to set a bar that would build on other disability and human rights legislation regulations and policies which provide lesser protections and therefore use the Act to lift the bar on accessibility.They wanted the Act to provide accessibility in all areas of life. Obstacles may include but are not limited to physical legal information communication attitudinal technological or other barriers. So they wanted the Act to go broadly across all areas where accessibility was an issue.They wanted the Act to set policy to influence and effect the development and the implementation of public accessibility policy. The wanted the Act to champion access to all goods services and facilities and they wanted the Act to champion accessible workplaces employment and education. They wanted the Act to charge the Government with the responsibility to lead educate train inform and review and again I believe that they will feel this Act falls far short of doing all those.They wanted the Act to be enforceable and I know this is an area that is particularly disappointing in that if it cannot be enforced how much difference will it make? They wanted the Act to be made real through regulations so that it could be fairly implemented and they wanted to ensure that public funds were not used to create or perpetuate obstacles to full accessibility in all areas of life. They wanted the Act to be used as a lens through which other legislation could be vetted to ensure that other legislation was not in conflict with improving accessibility. They wanted the Act to have real force and real effect.So there will be disappointment amongst the advocacy groups that have been working long and hard on this legislation and the wider community of people living with disabilities. Disabled people and their families face significant barriers. They need improved access to housing transport information communication technology and public buildings and spaces and it is vitally important for that improved accessibility to enable them to participate in and feel belonging in the world.This bill is like the announcement of an announcement. It is a bill that enables two nomination committees to be formed with one nomination committee representing the community and one nomination committee representing Māori. The nomination committees are to nominate for the actual ministerial advisory committee and the ministerial advisory committee can then consult with the chief executive of the new disability ministry to have more technical committees. So it is a bill that enables committees to enable committees to enable committees and that is where the disability communities will be disappointed that it's almost kicking for touch their issues into committee after committee after committee.There will be a cycle of monitoring and review and that is where the disabled communities will be wanting to ensure that they have plenty of say in that review process. But the legislation is about process. It is not about regulations. It is not about time lines. It is not about reporting where there are access barriers. It is not about ensuring that public money doesn't get wasted on creating more barriers. It is a bill about committees to form committees to form committees.So I'm sure that in the select committee process we will get a significant number of submitters who say this doesn't go far enough. But I do have to sound something of a warning that we have not seen a lot of evidence of this Government taking notice of submitters with the most recent being the over 90000 submitters on three waters reform where they have gone ahead to employ executives even before those submitters have been heard. So I would temper expectations with those concerns. Thank you Madam Speaker.