Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Thank you Madam Chair. I don't want to appear greedy or over-eager but I'm also conscious that if no one stands up to take a call then the process comes to an end and I think it would be fair to the House and again—more importantly—the users of the system and those who find themselves unexpectedly or unwillingly even involved in the process to make sure that we understand clearly what it is that we are proposing. I for one came to the Chamber genuinely unsure whether I should recommend to my party that we support Supplementary Order Paper 350. I was inclined to say that we should but I did want to have a bit of comfort about the rationale behind the Oranga Tamariki aspect that again the ACT colleagues have outlined more fully and more clearly and in more detail as to the substance. So my point there I suppose is one more of process but I'm genuinely seeking some guidance there about the meaning and the intention of that. So in addition to those questions that I've previously put and do seek an answer to I have a couple more before I would expect that the committee of the whole House stage could reasonably finish and it's really to do with the way that the system will come into effect. So in thinking about recruitment and thinking about training of these Family Court Associates it's inherent in the concept of the bill that we are going to have people who come in to do these roles and I think we can agree that there is merit—indeed we've said that we do agree that there's merit—in the roles being created and performing the duties of the Family Court judge. But surely that can't be immediate and I just wonder: has there been any guidance from officials about the amount of time that it would take to get people on board what kind of training regime would be required and whether there are internal processes that would be needed to make sure that they are operating in a safe manner—I mean in a way that would reflect people feeling comfortable that justice is served within the Family Court. Presumably there might be court rules or other regulations—just to use that term in a general kind of way—that sit within the courts rather than in Government. So if the Minister would say that there'd be court rules that aren't appropriate for Parliament to impose or for the Government to impose then that would be fine; that would be acceptable. But nevertheless I think it does go to that point again that it won't be merely at the stroke of a pen by way of Royal assent for this bill that would see it enacted in a way that will make a difference immediately. So will there be a lag time and assuming that there will—I think the Minister would agree and I think everyone would agree that there'll be at least some period of time that it will take for the system to get up and running—do we have any feel for what that is? If it's six months rather than a year that's good I suppose; if it's three months rather than six months that's better still; and so forth. So some guidance there in terms of the advice that officials may have been able to provide about how quickly we'll get these benefits that we're all hoping and praying will be available to users of the Family Court system—again I would welcome that.