Eagle PaulPAUL EAGLE (Labour—Rongotai): Kia ora Madam Speaker and thank you for the opportunity to speak on this bill. It's interesting because earlier today I was with our local iwi post-settlement entity Taranaki Whānui a developer from the Wellington Company and subcontractors I guess you would call them. We had Aoraki the main contractor but there for the sod turning of just under 100 new homes here in Wellington City was I guess the whānau of builders who were going to make this thing happen. I knew I was speaking on this this afternoon and thought Here goes a collaboration of the building community who have obviously made things work and this is what 'good' looks like." I know representing my patch of Wellington now for many years I've seen this alliance of people—these contractors and entities—come together and they're in the midst of building several successful projects. So part of me thought that wouldn't it be great if we didn't need something like this? Because you saw a trusted relationship across multiple entities who could build homes and housing of all sorts. So I thought earlier today that this is obviously what success looks like and long may it be. From the conversation that I had with the main contractor there—I said "Look this is what's happening in Parliament." People are always eager to know—believe it or not—what we're doing. I said that this piece of work is coming through. I thought how relevant could it be considering the work that they are doing and the work we are doing? So one of them sent me an article about retentions and the insights from the Ebert Construction insolvency case and some practical advice for subcontractors. It actually came from Lane Neave a national legal company. But in here it gave some really good definitions about the very issues that that are covered by this bill. Even when I looked at the situation with Ebert here it actually says that for the most part Ebert had complied with all of its statutory obligations however just during those final months accounting systems etc. began to break down other administrative errors crept in and then it fell short of the total retentions owed to subcontractors. But it does give a really easy to read background. It covers Mainzeal as well—the other biggie—but makes some notes when it references to them and it mentions this in the bill that the money was often used as interest-free working capital by the main contractor. "The subcontractors' interests in the retentions were unsecured." and then "In the event of the main contractor's insolvency the prospects of recovery were grim." We've heard those stories here this afternoon. Interestingly the "subcontractors' options for confronting such issues during pre-contractual negotiations were (and are) limited due to their relatively weak bargaining position. The system was always perceived as deeply unsatisfactory". We've heard stories today—my colleagues from Auckland Central and Ōtaki talk about the exposure to subcontractors to an unacceptably high level and then it talks about Mainzeal. So I think that provides a good basis to do something and that was looked at five six seven years ago. So it's been a long time coming. Can I acknowledge the Minister for Building and Construction the Hon Poto Williams. This is the second bill in front of the House that I've spoken on in two weeks. Last week it was around the modular components compliance and other bits and pieces; this week it's the construction contracts. I think this demonstrates her commitment to get some action on things that have been lying around—dare I use that term—and sorting them out and that's the sign of a good Minister who puts in the mahi who brings together the odd bits and pieces and then gets on with it. So I thought that was a great piece of work and there's some similarities here and it goes back to a piece of work that you Madam Assistant Speaker Salesa did when you were in this role and I mentioned it last week: the Construction Sector Accord. Who would have thought that bringing together a disparate group of people but all with the same kaupapa of delivering good better construction and infrastructure in Aotearoa New Zealand—this is the sort of stuff that comes out of it. They want action—probably wanted it a whole lot more quickly—but that accord has meant that at least there's some sector agreement on what matters most to them. They then come together and go "Right. These are the things that we'd like to see passed. This is urgent." They are already working with the trust and confidence of the Minister. What I said last week was the word "reassurance". This gives some reassurance that they play their part we play our part. I know that those are the words of the contractor today. They are willing and ready to go. These are things that actually hold them up. They just want to get on with it. The great thing about talking to people who build homes and developers is the scent of innovation creativity but most of all urgency. They just want to get on with it. They know what's deemed to be red tape. They don't dwell on things. They just get on with it. And that's the great thing: maybe we could learn a lesson or two from them. But this fits very much in with that plan.So moving to the bill I am very confident this will go some way to ensuring—and I am always impressed when colleagues across the floor can bring their stories to this House and demonstrate the need for why things should happen. You know we can pull bits out to say this isn't perfect but I think the essence of this in terms of making sure that the retention money is held back in a way where it doesn't get—I think the term is—commingled or tangled up or somehow intertwined with other accounts and funds and used for other reasons. We're saying no no and no to that. So I'm confident that when this goes through we'll have the sector support. Interestingly enough the sector tells me that it's already trying to demonstrate this already. So you know they don't want this to be an issue they don't want—in the climate we've got now the importance of building an alliance of contractors subcontractors whatever we call them there's a sense of "we need to keep everyone happy everyone gets a bite of the pie". Why? Because there's more work to do. There's a whole lot more building infrastructure to do and one of the things that you'll often see at sites is the same developer the same main contractor and the same subcontractors. Their logos are on those fences right across the city. I know in Wellington that's very much the case. I can almost guess who's working with who be it Willis Bond and LT McGuinness or the Wellington Co. and Aoraki—there are many other examples. So what this demonstrates is that this is now addressing a very important aspect of the construction sector. The sector embraces that. It's already been demonstrated and I think we can with confidence ensure that some of those issues raised as I said by this piece of work about retentions that came through to me and the did I see the word lessons learnt—there we are—from the Ebert issue. Once and for all these will be resolved. I commend this bill to the House."