Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill — In Committee 
Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:635;Page:6671] 
Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill 
In Committee 
Part 5 Preliminary and key provisions 
PANSY WONG (National) 
: 
 I am really delighted to take the first call on the previously non-existent Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill. When we flick through Part 5 we can hardly find a single page that has not been amended. So I am delighted to say that the Commerce Committee is indeed a very hard-working and responsible select committee—all the more so because of the National Party members on the committee. We have actually gone through Part 5 with a fine-tooth comb even though it deals largely with matters of definition. I will share with members some of those distinctive details. I am raising them because the Minister the Hon Harry Duynhoven is in the chair. I am glad about that because I know he will take them quite seriously. 
 For example we actually spent quite a bit of time on clause 69 “Exemption for sanitary plumbing in rural areas” and on clause 70 “Provisions relating to alteration of boundaries of local authority districts” and ultimately we ran out of time. The officials could not quite get all the background information that would have enabled the select committee members to understand why the exemption relating to sanitary plumbing in rural areas is to be continued. Do we care less about people in rural districts than in urban areas or is it the practical issue that if we impose the same requirements in rural and urban areas then rural people might not get plumbing etc. done? And why is it that the boundary of a local authority district would be subject to the type of exemption set out in clause 70? 
So I point out to the Minister in the chair the Hon Harry Duynhoven that although the select committee worked diligently on the issues we regret that because of the time limit some of the important issues have not been tackled. I first register for the benefit of the Minister that there is unfinished work for him to champion. [ 
Interruption 
] I am not sure why there is all this movement in the Chamber; I would like members to respect the plumbers and the drainlayers etc. who appeared in front of the select committee to make submissions. I promise that we will raise the unfinished business so that the Minister can continue to look into it in the future given that those exemptions have not been explained to us properly because the officials said that their records did not go back very far and they could not really get to the bottom of the issue in the time available. So in the meantime the select committee has accepted that those exemptions will continue. But certainly at some appropriate future time we need to get to the bottom of what the valid reasons for those exemptions may be. 
Some of the other exemptions that we have raised are good ones. For example apprentices are exempt during training. We have accepted that it is very practical for them not to be licensed or registered while they are going through their study. 
I think the Minister will appreciate that the select committee has worked diligently to improve on these now separated bills given that National opposed the first reading of the Energy Safety Review Bill. 
CHRIS TREMAIN (National—Napier) 
: 
 I rise to speak to Part 5 of the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill. As we have said tonight its provisions began as part of the Energy Safety Review Bill and morphed as members know into the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill. Before I rose to speak tonight I was thinking about the stages we have gone through on this bill and the various plumbers and electricians who came before the Commerce Committee. I cast my eyes through the telephone book here to see which plumbers from Hawke’s Bay will be sitting tonight with their ears to the radio listening to the debate on this bill. They are the likes of J J O’Connor—the Minister in the chair the Hon Harry Duynhoven may know some of these guys—my own brother who owns Total Plumbing and Irrigation Ltd Rigby Plumbing and Hagen and Owen Ltd. Those are all core guys who are part of the Hawke’s Bay network. In particular I pay my respects to E G Wall a plumber from Hawke’s Bay who passed away recently. He had had over 40 years’ service in the plumbing industry in Hawke’s Bay and he will be difficult to replace. It was guys like E G Wall whom we heard talk before the select committee about some of the issues they would have to face which I will talk about in relation to Part 6 and Part 7 regarding licensing and registration. 
I will step back to Part 5 which deals with the purpose of the bill and gives a number of definitions for the legislation. We spent much time on deciding what the definition of “drain” and “drainlaying” would be and on discussing the meaning of “gasfitting” where a gas supply would start and where it would finish and the meaning of “sanitary plumbing” and various aspects of that part of the bill. Those matters are hardly earth-shattering but are important. In coming back to the purposes of the bill I say this legislation will replace the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Act of 1976. It covers the registering licensing and disciplining of plumbers gasfitters and drainlayers and it contains mechanisms designed to assure the public that people engaged in the provision of sanitary plumbing gasfitting and drainlaying services are competent to undertake the work. 
When we first came to the Commerce Committee a number of submissions were before the committee and those submissions were one of the key reasons for this bill being split from the Energy Safety Review Bill. The likes of George M Todd craftsman plumber came before the select committee and told us he strongly opposed the introduction of competency-based licensing and the move away from registration-based licences. In fact that gentleman strongly opposed the Energy Safety Review Bill. He felt that it gave too much power to the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board. That was one of the first reasons for splitting the bill. As Minister Duynhoven announced earlier there had been very poor consultation from the board back to the plumbing fraternity so we made the decision to split this legislation from the Energy Safety Review Bill. That meant we could go back and consult the industry in more detail. 
The second reason for splitting the bill off from the Energy Safety Review Bill has not been covered in much detail tonight. That was the issue around the relationship between the industry training organisation and the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board which at that point in time was the subject of a ministerial inquiry undertaken by Hazel Armstrong. But there were two major concerns in that regard. The first was the level of pass rates that were coming out of the industry training organisation. The commentary on the bill states that in 2005 only 11 percent of national certificate holders who sat the final qualifying exam set by the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board passed that exam. That was down from a pass rate of 39 percent in 2003. So the second concern was that it was very clear that there had been a breakdown in the relationship between the board and the industry training organisation. The board was putting in a capstone examination and it had failed to talk closely with the industry training organisation. The relationship was so bad that the industry training organisation was not putting through the plumbers at the level that was needed. Those reasons together meant there was a change to the original bill. 
BRIAN CONNELL (National—Rakaia) 
: 
 I was in my office listening to the debate and found it so enthralling that I thought I would come down and make a contribution. The reason is that I have some experience with the plumbing industry—and I declare a conflict of interest upfront—in that I own a company that manufactures hot-water cylinders. My company has been in business for 45 years and my association with the plumbing industry and the history of my company in that association is one that deserves recognition. 
Registration as prescribed in the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill is overdue but that is not to tarnish the reputation of those people who have been in the industry for a long time. In fact it provides them with the due credit they deserve because here is an industry if there ever has been one that is worthy of our respect. Anyone who has had something go wrong with their plumbing recognises the need not only to get someone who is competent to fix it but also as an added advantage to get someone who is registered and is able to do the job and can give that guarantee of quality service that the community deserves. That is the type of tradesperson we in this country respect. 
I heard the Minister say in an earlier debate that he is an electrician by trade and I think he takes pride in the fact that he has that recognition. Is it not as reasonable to give that recognition to the plumbing industry as well? So here is a bill that in my view is long overdue. 
When I had the opportunity to sit on the Commerce Committee on the bill I was very impressed with the way members of Parliament interacted. They were taking the issue extremely seriously. The contribution from members around the table was one that gave me confidence that the parliamentary process does at times work well. Of course I think the lead was coming from the National members on the select committee. My colleagues there were taking the issues extremely seriously. They were putting issues on the table and saying that we needed to work around them to make sure we structured a bill that would work not for the time being but for the longer term. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: There is too much idle chatter going on. It is very disconcerting for the member who is trying to address the Committee. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: I apologise for my idle chatter Mr Chairperson. I will give you something a little more specific. 
One issue in the select committee really triggered my interest—that is the lack of apprentices who have qualified through the registration board. That really did trip my interest. I know that members of the select committee took that issue extremely seriously. Some of the statistics I saw showed that pass rates were as low as 11 percent in terms of qualifications. That in itself is a real indictment on the way the industry was being structured and something had to be done about that. I congratulate the committee on taking that issue head-on. 
I know that the Minister takes these issues extremely seriously as well and it might be something he would like to take a call on and explain how we will do more about tightening up registration around the plumbing industry so that the competence I have talked about can be captured in perpetuity. I thank you for your indulgence Mr Chair. 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Associate Minister of Energy) 
: 
 Thank you Mr Chairman. I think it is a pity that Katherine Rich the chairperson of the Commerce Committee is not here this evening because— 
Simon Power 
: Point of order— 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I know what the member is going to say. The Minister knows he cannot refer to the absence of a member. All of us at some time or another have urgent public business to attend to. 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN 
: Thank you Mr Chairman. You are quite right. Can I say that it is a pity that Katherine Rich has not taken a call this evening because she would have added considerably to the debate and maybe even have been able to help some of her colleagues who seem to have had a little amnesia in regard to the processes here. I say to Brian Connell that I greatly appreciated his comments. One learns something new every day. I did not know for example Brian—even though I have known you for a fair while— 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Use the member’s full name please. 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN 
: I did not know that the member was in the business of making hot-water cylinders many of which I have probably installed without realising they came from his company. 
The issue of the relationship between the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board and the Industry Training Organisation was one of the really difficult ones that had to be considered during the process of this bill. The registration and competence issue that the member referred to is a really important one. First is the basic qualification which is necessary. Secondly it is necessary to ensure ongoing competence and I think the member who has just spoken was the first speaker in this debate from his side of the Chamber who actually recognised that a very important feature of this bill is to ensure ongoing competence. 
To Pansy Wong I say that yes the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill was split out from the original Energy Safety Review Bill but the bills were kept as companion bills. If one looks at the two bills together one will see that Parts 1 to 4 remain with the original bill and that Part 5 onwards becomes the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill. It does indicate that they will be reassembled some time. We also had the view—and on one occasion I sat in the Commerce Committee and took part in a round-table discussion which I thought was a very valuable thing to do—over the issues about how we managed the dysfunctional relationships that were in the plumbing gasfitting and drainlaying industry. Whereas the electrical part of the bill was ready to proceed—the electrical industry and the gas industry were keen to have the bill progressed—we still had work to do with the plumbing and drainlaying side of the industry. 
 I am pleased that the select committee took that approach. I am pleased that the issues that were so obvious then have now been largely resolved and we have moved on and that the review that Hazel Armstrong conducted on behalf I think of the Minister for Tertiary Education showed that the issues being spoken about by many members—the low pass rates and the difficulty of getting qualified people out into the industry—were actually being addressed. I think that the review has given us a way forward. It has allowed the industry to regroup to refocus on its core task of training apprentices and ensuring that those tradespeople are properly qualified. That means not only that they are registered to be tradespeople but that their practising licence if you like—their currency—is established and that will see the industry in much better stead. 
I think we now have the bills in pretty good shape. The select committee has done a good job. It has done the job that select committees are there to do—to listen to the public and to get feedback from them. I thoroughly agreed with the concept of keeping registration. I actually strongly argued that we must keep registration as well as a practising licence regime. I think it would be unfair if I were not in Parliament for me to be expected to resume work in the electrical trade after 18 20-odd years away without having any refresher course for example. That would be just crazy stuff. So that is why we have the concept of an original registration plus a currency—a licence to practise. I think that that is a very good model on which to build and the electricity gas and plumbing and drainlaying industry all now have that concept embedded in this legislation. I think we have done a good job. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 78 in the name of the Hon Harry Duynhoven to Part 5 be agreed to. 
Amendment agreed to. 
Part 5 as amended agreed to. 
Part 6 Registration and licensing of plumbers gasfitters and drainlayers 
PANSY WONG (National) 
: 
 The Minister is not going to get away with many of the statements he has just made. Although the Commerce Committee may have listened to the public I am afraid the Minister has not. Let me list some of the very strong feelings against the bill in its original form. 
First of all let me remind the public that National did not support the first reading of the Energy Safety Review Bill. But we are now supporting the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill because firstly it has been separated out and secondly a lot of changes have been made to it. Let me share this submission from the Horowhenua branch of Master Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers (NZ) Inc. First of all the reason why plumbers were against the original bill—wholesale—was that they had received a letter from the Hon Damien O’Connor on 27 May 2004. The Minister made it very clear to plumbers that the Energy Safety Review Bill—[ 
Interruption 
] If members on the Labour benches would calm down I do intend to share the detail with them. 
I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. As a member of Parliament I am completely offended tonight by the total lack of respect for the Committee process. Members on the Opposition side are debating this bill seriously because a lot of submitters felt very strongly about it. But all I am getting is a barrage of people talking on the Labour side of the Chamber. Mr Chairman I would like you to exercise your authority and bring some respect back to this process. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Thank you. I say to the member that I have already raised the issue once with the Committee this evening and I appreciate what the member is saying. But the talking is coming from both sides. I remind members that it is a matter of good conduct and of being considerate of others who are trying to address the Committee. It is a longstanding convention in this place that members should not conduct conversations in the Chamber unless it is absolutely necessary to do so and then only in a way so as not to disturb proceedings. Proceedings are being disturbed and another member on my right has also approached me with concern about the level of noise in the Chamber. I ask members to show some courtesy to the honourable member Pansy Wong. 
PANSY WONG 
: Thank you Mr Chairman. In his letter the Minister the Hon Damien O’Connor reassured the Horowhenua group that the original Energy Safety Review Bill would include only requirements relating to electrical and gas workers and include provisions similar to the ones in the Electricity Act to allow for interim suspension of electricity workers’ registration. And then according to the group’s submission the Minister went on to say that those provisions did not include plumbers and drainlayers as similar provisions were expected to be included in the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Bill. Therefore I ask the Minister to take note that first of all plumbers do not agree because they were expressly told by the previous Minister that the Energy Safety Review Bill would not include them. Secondly their concern is with regard to cost. 
The group raised that subject on Tuesday 19 October 2004. A delegation from the Society of Master Plumbers and Gasfitters met with the Hon Damien O’Connor who was responsible for the bill at that stage. The Minister asked the tradesmen what their current charge rate was for plumbers. They told him that it differed but that in the Horowhenua area it was around $45 to $50 an hour plus GST. Well the Minister’s response was to ask why the group did not simply charge the consumer $80 an hour because of the introduction of this new bill. 
I think it is appalling when a group of plumbers was taking the issue seriously and explaining that the bill would unnecessarily increase costs and that it would affect the charge-out fee to consumers and all the Minister could say was to put up the costs. That is incredible for a Labour Government that is supposed to look after ordinary New Zealanders yet all it could say was to put up the tax put up the cost as everything is going up. When National members are confronted with submissions like that we demand to know in detail about these increased costs. Of course we support competency professionalism and protection of the public but that has to be balanced and reasonable. So we are glad that we have argued that point. 
I want to register our appreciation of the Labour members on the Commerce Committee because they listened to large groups of submitters particularly from the plumbing sector. We listened to them and we believed that their submissions were made in good faith. The plumbers were outraged because of the lack of consultation and because of their concern for the unnecessary cost that might have to be passed on to consumers. More important these plumbers are very very proud of the fact that they are registered plumbers. This is a very emotional issue which they debated and argued very strongly in front of the select committee. As a member of the Commerce Committee I can say we take on their issues very seriously. 
MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 I would like to endorse some of the comments that the previous speaker has made in her speech on this Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill. The select committee treated this bill with a great deal of seriousness but I want to traverse a couple of points in it that were critical to the development of this part. Clearly a number of issues were raised in the course of our hearing the submissions on this bill that were almost beyond the scope of legislation as such but that were issues of real concern. 
We traversed some of these issues in the first reading of this bill when Katherine Rich as chair of the Commerce Committee made reference to exam pass rates somewhere in the order of 11 percent. The issues to do with the relationship between the industry training organisation and the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board were behind a lot of the feeling and the impetus that resulted in this bill. 
The registration and licensing components of this bill have been traversed previously in debate but it is worth noting that the Commerce Committee did take very seriously the concerns that were raised—certainly concerns that some of us by our own research discovered as we proceeded with some of the submissions to this bill. I took the opportunity to look through 10 years’ worth of annual reports of the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board in order to look at pass rates and I discovered that there was certainly something rotten in the State of Denmark in respect of the numbers that entered into apprenticeships and the numbers who exited the other side as qualified plumbers gasfitters and drainlayers. 
This issue was addressed largely by Hazel Armstrong’s report which was commissioned by the Minister for Tertiary Education because of his interest in the provision of education for apprentices through tertiary institutions. As a result we heard a number of things that as I say may not have been specifically within the scope of this bill but they were important and did deserve a respectful hearing. I think that where we got to in terms of registration and licensing was absolutely right and it reflected where we had got to with the electricians and their registration as well. 
So with the combination of these two pieces of legislation we now have a uniform process for the registering—that is the training and the acknowledgment of the completed training—of tradespeople who in this particular case are plumbers gasfitters and drainlayers and for the ongoing licensing of competence of these tradespeople. It was distressing to see how many young people—young men—had chosen to go into these occupations and had not been permitted through some dysfunction between the industry training organisation and the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board to take up a career of their choice. 
I will not speak to subsequent parts of this bill at the moment but when we come to Part 8 I may well take another call to point out the areas where we have corrected those particular issues in this legislation. Suffice it to say right now we have a streamlined and unified registration and licensing process that not only protects the identification of tradespeople as registered tradespeople but also protects the public and workers in respect of ongoing safety issues. 
CHRIS TREMAIN (National—Napier) 
: 
 I rise to speak to Part 6 of the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill. Before doing so I acknowledge the officials for the hard work they put into this bill which has been ongoing and arduous. I say well done to them; they have done an excellent job. 
Part 6 gets to the heart of the bill and deals with the registration and licensing of plumbers gasfitters and drainlayers. When this part was originally considered by the Commerce Committee as part of the Energy Safety Review Bill we got comments from plumbers in the field who had not been consulted by their board or did not really understand how this licensing or continuing professional development would impact on them. That is when we had the likes of George M Todd saying in a submission that he strongly opposed ongoing professional development. 
When that happened I realised I needed to understand where this licensing was going what it would entail and what ongoing competency would be required of plumbers. So I went and had a talk to the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board. I found out that licensing is still required right now and that it costs $90 per year. There is already a licensing regime with the existing registration certificate. Of the three trades we are talking about—plumbing gasfitting and drainlaying—there is already an ongoing competency requirement for gasfitters which at the time I was not aware of. Gasfitters are audited on an annual basis unlike plumbers who are audited on a job-by-job basis on the major plumbing jobs they do in houses. Gasfitters are not audited this way; they are audited annually by the board so they already have a continuing professional development requirement. But what does that actually mean? 
Plumbers were coming to the select committee concerned that the requirement would take hours and days of their time and would cause ongoing costs for them by taking their employees out of the trade to go on courses. I found out that the board was proposing a 16 credit per annum continuing professional development qualification. Those 16 credits were divided into two lots of eight credits whereby people could choose between technical courses for eight credits and non-technical courses. 
The technical courses included welding and pipe sizing—the standard types of courses that one would think it would be good for a plumber to go forward with. It was the non-technical courses that the plumbers were—justifiably—concerned about. These included the likes of becoming a Microsoft Word user for which people could get four continuing professional development points. They could get points for gaining email and Internet qualifications. These options were on the table and this is where many of the plumbers became concerned. They thought these courses would become compulsory. 
The reality is that the non-technical side of the course is non-compulsory which made a big difference. Many plumbers particularly those who were heading towards the end of their working life were concerned. E G Wall whom I talked about before and who has been plumbing for 40 years came to see me in my electorate office and said: “Why in God’s name do I need to be doing a foundation Excel course in spreadsheeting?”. I could not argue with him. The very fact that these non-technical courses are not compulsory made a big difference. 
Moving on I approached a number of gasfitters who are already involved in continuing professional development courses. A young gasfitter called Carl Simons said that there should be ongoing competency. He felt it was a good thing but that it needed much better consultation and course provision. I say to the Minister that we need to make very clear to the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board that the provision of these types of licensing courses should be available throughout the regions so that plumbers and gasfitters do not have to travel around the country to attend a particular course. I think that is a very important point. Young Carl Simons believed that the ongoing licensing requirement added another level to his trade and said he was right behind it. 
I talked to Murray Rigby who is a 52-year-old gasfitter in the Hawke’s Bay. He did not think it was a bad thing. He thought the courses were pretty straightforward. He felt there was a lot of resistance initially but that overall it was good for the profession and would take him forward. So I recommend to the Minister that these courses be made available on a regional basis and that there be plenty of them so that plumbers gasfitters and drainlayers can get to them easily. 
Licensing has been a key issue in this legislation. It is an area we were concerned about. Lastly National members Labour members and the wider committee were concerned about the older plumbers. In the commentary to the bill the committee put in something that I think officials and the board need to take note of. We stated: “We were concerned by the introduction of licensing requirements for tradespeople in the later years of their profession who after thirty or forty years of plying their trade will be required to pass competency tests.” We were concerned that if those tests were too onerous guys in their twilight years would just say: “Enough! I can’t be bothered going on.” and we would see those people leave the trade. We did see that happen initially when continuing professional development was introduced to the gasfitting side of things. That is something we need to be careful of and that is why members from National certainly and I know ones from Labour put that particular part in the commentary on the bill. Thank you Mr Chairperson. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 78 in the name of the Hon Harry Duynhoven to Part 6 be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Part 6 as amended agreed to. 
Part 7 Discipline and offences 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 78 in the name of the Hon Harry Duynhoven to Part 7 be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Part 7 as amended agreed to. 
Part 8 Administration appeals and miscellaneous provisions 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: The debate on Part 8 includes debate on schedules 2 and 3. 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Associate Minister of Energy) 
: 
 I will take just a brief call partly to answer Chris Tremain who mentioned in the debate on Part 6 some issues in regard to the way courses were structured by the plumbing industry etc. Mr Tremain quite rightly said there was concern in the industry particularly among its older participants that these courses were somehow mandated by the legislation. Well that is the job properly of the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board and Part 8 of the bill sets out how the board will function. It improves the transparency of the board addresses some of the issues in this bill and addresses some of the issues that have been causing some grief in the industry. That is a result of the review that the committee had. The committee saw fit to change this part of the bill and to strengthen it. 
The determination by the industry training organisation—the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board—as to what sorts of courses are necessary for a practising licence and what sorts of courses might be offered is entirely up to the board to make rather than for us to prescribe in legislation and that is fit and proper. I think that it is probably what we have now and that this bill will be welcomed by the industry. 
I take on board what Mr Tremain said about how plumbers were saying that they were fearful of this legislation and that the changes were going too far. The bill is now in better shape as a result of the select committee work done on it and as a result of officials working with the industry to try to redress some of the misinformation that had gone out early on. 
The industry as we heard earlier had not been adequately consulted—not by the officials the Minister or the ministry in terms of getting the bill together but because the industry itself did not have effective communication between the board and the participants. The ordinary plumber working in society was not getting the feedback from the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board as to what should be happening. 
There is of course split accountability. The Energy Safety Review Bill properly comes under my delegation but the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill was a subset of Ministry of Health delegations. Therefore different Ministers were involved as well. 
So I will just say that I am very pleased with where this legislation has got to. The points made by Mr Tremain were valid and they have largely been addressed by what has happened. I shall be particularly interested to see when we get to the review stage in 3 years’ time—as is set out in the legislation—how this has worked out and whether the plumbing gasfitting and drainlaying industry wants to change the provisions that are now before us in this bill. Thank you Mr Chairperson. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 78 in the name of the Hon Harry Duynhoven to Part 8 be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Part 8 as amended agreed to. 
Schedule 2 agreed to.  
Schedule 3 Consequential amendments 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 78 in the name of the Hon Harry Duynhoven to schedule 3 be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Schedule 3 as amended agreed to. 
Clause 1 agreed to.  
Clause 2 agreed to.  
Bill to be reported with amendment presently. 
House resumed. 
The Chairperson reported the Energy Safety Review Bill with amendment and that the Committee had divided it into four bills; and the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill with amendment. 
Report adopted.