Pugh MaureenMAUREEN PUGH (National): Thank you very much Mr Speaker. I stand too to speak to the Local Government (Pecuniary Interests Register) Amendment Bill. I'll start by quoting part of the pledge I guess that MPs actually sign up to with their pecuniary interest. It says in there that it is central to the democratic idea that the purpose of elected public office is to serve the public not to enrich the office-holder". And I can assure you that in the local government world—and I think my colleagues who have been in local government will attest to this—those who put their hand up to be elected on to small local councils do not do so to be enriched; in fact it is usually a matter of social service. Very different from regional councils and from cities their salaries are quite a lot different but certainly in those small councils it is a matter of public service only.One of the things that has always been evolving in local government from my experience there was that you want to attract self-employed people you want to attract successful business people because they bring a certain set of skills; even retirees—and they usually do have quite a portfolio of assets and interests. And it will as I think my colleague Ian McKelvie pointed out be a barrier to people to want to disclose everything about themselves. When I look at the bill and I look at the contents of a pecuniary interest return it says "relating to member's position" and I think this is work that the select committee is going to have to turn its mind to because how do you define "relating"? So is that a business in the district the city or the region that the local authority is responsible for? Is it a business that might that does or that could be a supplier or have some business interest in a council CCO—a council-controlled organisation? So I think defining that is going to be very important.But also in there it talks to "relating to member's activities"—"pecuniary interest return relating to member's activities". But that's got to also be defined because "relating to activities" in carrying out their role perhaps but not in the broader sense of that person's private enterprise or their interests outside of the council. So I think we've got to be really careful that we don't capture everything that's going on in a person's life or business. And I'll give you some examples: "a description of each gift (including hospitality and donations in cash or kind" so the cash that may pass over—and I don't know of anyone that actually gets cash passed across their palm but you don't want things like grandma's birthday present or even grandma's bequeath to you to be liable for a pecuniary interests register. Also things that happen in small communities—so it's a really good example right now: it's whitebait season. Most people in small council areas know each other. What happens if someone gives you a feed of whitebait or half a side of mutton? You know that sort of stuff happens a lot in rural communities. So is that going to be classed as "in kind" contributions and donations or is that just something that happens in rural communities?There's a bit that needs to happen in defining some of this work in here. I do agree that there needs to be some consistency but I don't know whether the Government has even turned its mind to working with Local Government New Zealand and asking them to provide that consistency across councils across New Zealand because there can be templates created. All this does is like Big Brother coming in over the top and saying "This is how we want you to do it. Don't work out your own system." Perhaps this is going to be another one of those nails in the coffin for local government because what's going to happen—in the policy statement it says "contribute to more robust decision-making by local authorities." Well actually there's not much decision making going to be left for local authorities by the time this Government's finished with them."