Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I'd like to speak in opposition to the shortening of the select committee process. If climate change legislation is worth doing then it's worth doing well. We know from long and hard experience in this House that legislation that is made in a rushed manner ends up being bad legislation. There is a reason why we ask the public to submit and allow select committees to seek advice and deliberate over a period of time and that is because often the public know things that we in this House do not. Often the public are able to provide advice that actually helps us as members of Parliament make better laws than we would otherwise. I draw on a typically impassioned and very good speech made earlier in the House today by Chlöe Swarbrick where she lamented that politicians are unable to tackle long-term problems because of the fact that too often we are focused on short-term electoral cycles rather than what is good public policy for generations of New Zealanders to come.In this instance by reporting back as the Minister in charge James Shaw has asked on 2 April well it mightn't seem so bad standing here on 5 November. It mightn't seem that five months was too bad. But in actual fact this is a place—the only place in New Zealand I'm aware of—where the workers are allowed to vote for their own holidays. This coming summer members of Parliament have elected to be in recess from 18 December—or perhaps 19 December if we sit the full term—all the way through to if I recall correctly 8 February.SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member will resume his seat. I'm going to draw the member back to the motion which relates to the select committee and not the sitting of the House.DAVID SEYMOUR: I don't wish to depart from the motion but I feel it is important to note that while there are nominally five months the real time that Parliament will be able to operate that it will be hearing submissions from the public and that a select committee will be able to deliberate is going to be much shorter than it might appear from the report back date itself because the sittings of the House are adjourned for quite a long period over the Christmas break.SPEAKER: Order! I've now warned the member a second time. We are debating when this should go to the select committee for how long and the conditions when the House is sitting. We are not debating how often the select committee will sit during the recess and it can sit every day but Sunday and Christmas Day by way of the Standing Orders.DAVID SEYMOUR: Well Mr Speaker I feel I've made that point and I'll say no more about it.I think it's clear that if we wish to do climate change policy and it's worth doing then it's worth doing right and I think it's a mistake for the House to shorten the time taken making quality policy so that as the member says it can be ready in time for the trading scheme to be implemented one year earlier than it otherwise might have been. So in conclusion we could have the opportunity to follow due process and make better law. I think that if the House supports this motion then it is making a mistake for the quality of law and the procedure of the House and it would be much better if we stayed with those procedures if we gave the full six months normally due for consultation by select committees on bills before they report back and if we were prepared to accept that perhaps—and sometimes things can be done faster than expected—there will be a one-year delay in implementing good legislation rather than legislating too fast and risking getting it wrong. Thank you Mr Speaker.