Macindoe TimHon TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): Thank you Madam Chair. I appreciate that. And could I just point out to my good colleague the member for Helensville that he does have the opportunity to seek another call. He doesn't have to take the full five minutes. In fact I don't anticipate that I'll be taking the full five minutes for this particular call because I have to say I share the pain of the chair of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee that we were not able to continue asking the questions that we wished to ask on the more substantive Part 2 of the bill. But OK we'll get over that. We're now into Part 3 and I would just like to focus on two specific clauses of Part 3 which deals with the applications for registration and permits—obviously a very important provision in any measure of this type. In clause 36 there are provisions for those who might choose to give false or misleading information in their applications for registration or for a permit. Specifically clause 36(1) says A person must not in relation to an application for registration or a permit under this Act supply any information that the person knows or ought to know is materially false or misleading." I don't think anyone would argue with that. It would be quite bizarre not to have a provision of that sort. But in subclause (2) we read that "A person who breaches subsection (1) commits an offence and is liable on conviction—(a) in the case of an individual to a term of imprisonment not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding $10000 or both: (b) in any other case to a fine not exceeding $20000." Now the reason I want to highlight this clause is those penalties strike me as being extraordinarily light. In the context of this particularly important matter I would have thought that that really didn't amount to much of a deterrent at all. The Minister in the chair commented that I and others who are speaking tonight had a part in producing the report and that's true. But I'd point out to the Minister I was not actually a member of the committee when it dealt with the submissions on this bill so I have not had the opportunity—Chris Bishop: That's a shame.Hon TIM MACINDOE: Well that's nice of you to say that Mr Bishop. It's one of your more helpful interjections this evening I have to say but that is actually not saying very much at all. But the point I want to make is I didn't have the opportunity during the course of the hearings on the bill—that were so ably chaired by Mr Simon O'Connor—to ask this particular question and I would like to hear from the Minister if I may please why what seems to be such a light level of penalties was decided upon because I'm not sure that it does amount to much of a deterrent at all. In particular—and I feel sure that the answer will be yes but I hope it will be—do those penalties mirror the penalties that are being provided for or legislated in comparable jurisdictions? We've heard tonight that the bill mirrors best practice internationally and that's very good. It reflects what's happening in Australia. But in particular do the provisions of clause 36 and the penalties outlined therein represent best international practice and mirror what is happening elsewhere? Now the other question that I'd like to ask if I may relates to clause 40 in the provision for the registration of brokers. Clause 40(2) provides that "The Secretary must ensure that the register is available to the public on an Internet site maintained by or on behalf of the Secretary." Now again I'm the first to concede that that's perfectly understandable—in most respects you have to have some reputable way of ensuring that that information is available—but I just wonder what safeguards are there for the possibly adverse consequences in providing brokers' details so publicly. Now I recognise it's not an easy question to answer because they have to be made available to those who have a legitimate reason to access them but I'm just wondering what protections the brokers themselves enjoy from those who might have very negative and illegal intent if they are able to access those details so publicly. In particular what—Kieran McAnulty: Repetition. Hon TIM MACINDOE: I don't think there's any repetition on this point at all Mr McAnulty. I haven't heard anyone raise this point whatsoever and I would like to think that you given the position you're occupying for the Government tonight would also want to have an assurance that there will be appropriate monitoring of potentially illegal and inappropriate activity. I'm sure your good colleague the member for Ōhāriu given his previous role in the police would also want to have that assurance because the police may well be the people who are having to monitor this provision. So I'll just make those two quick questions. I very much look forward to hearing the answers."