O'Connor GregGREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu): Thank you Madam Speaker. It is traditional at this stage to congratulate the member whose bill was drawn from the ballot but I want to go a little bit further. I mean the irony of having been a recent foreign affairs Minister and to draw a bill from the ballot which is so close to the subject and the topics of that previous ministry must have brought much joy to the member when it was brought. He must have thought there was an irony in it. It's the same joy perhaps of another bill being drawn out of the ballot by Sir David Carter when he drew the Electoral (Integrity Repeal) Amendment Bill and then subsequently passed on to his colleague—now everyone's ex-colleague—Nick Smith. Again the eagerness in which they will have attacked that because obviously it was topics near and dear to their hearts.But this bill—and there's a lot to like about it on first reading. However like many members' bills that come before this House it's very important that they be seen in their context because what often happens—and we all at different stages of our lives often on our way here have ended up having to deal with pieces of legislation. Sometimes they come back here for a fix because the full implications of the legislation we pass here if the proper policy work is not done and we don't work through the real implications of it and it is done in isolation—which as I say so often members' bills as they are now do—then we end up with something that is not workable.Now this is an important issue and it needs to be done properly. Multilateralism is something the world is lacking currently. If we have a look at the things that are bothering the world most at the moment—we'll just have a look at Afghanistan which was one of the more recent. OK it was NATO that decided to go into Afghanistan but it wasn't UN sanctioned. I wouldn't say it was quite a unilateral act but certainly it wasn't done with the sanction of the UN nor subsequently was the invasion of Iraq. Both those things have left the world in a heck of a mess and that again is why we really do need to be looking at multilateral response.Even COVID—as I look across the House and see my masked colleagues I can't help but be reminded of this ever-present problem that is COVID. How much better would our response have been if we had been truly multilateral? But no what we've done is each nation going into their shell doing what is best for them with little consideration for other nations. We saw today news about how bad it is in Africa how other nations are not working to ensure that we do get the remedy into Africa. Even our own selves bilateralism certainly has enabled us to get our own COVID response up to where it needs to be but a multilateral approach which is really the antithesis of what we're talking about here would have been so much better for the world in which we exist.So again I'd say to the member who drew this he will know from his previous role as a Minister of Foreign Affairs that to actually walk on the world globe it is the multilateralism—the power and the strength of the multilateral approach—that enables New Zealand to be able to get to the table where it needs to be. And the trend that this bill epitomises which is moving back towards each nation making its own decisions each nation putting in its own sanctions just weakens the response that we need as a world if we're going to put it in a better shape than certainly it is now or we can expect it to be.So what I'd say to the member is well done. As I say there is a lot to like about the bill but it's something that really does have to be seen in the context of a desire and a need for a multilateral approach to the type of issues that it does seek to remedy so I can't support this bill.