Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Helensville): Apologies Mac. Thank you Mr Chair. Thank you very much indeed. I'll try and live up to the speech that I know that my colleague the Hon Tim Macindoe would've given had he had the opportunity.Hon Tim Macindoe: Still will.CHRIS PENK: And still will no doubt. As to Part 2 of this bill it seems to me that Subpart 1 being at the very beginning would be a very good place to start as Maria von Trapp would no doubt have said if she were speaking and had been able to take the call on this.Chris Bishop: What did Maria von Trapp say?CHRIS PENK: Ha ha! She said Mr Bishop that the beginning was a very good place to start. So within Part 2 the first place that I would like to start is clause 9 namely Registration and permit required for brokering activity". This is very much the heart of the bill it seems to me because it states very definitively in subclause (1) that a person must not carry out a brokering activity unless one of two things applies: the first being of course that they are registered as a broker and that he or she or indeed it—if we're talking about a person that's not an actual person—has a permit for that activity. So much is straightforward and therefore I shan't belabour that point any further nor call upon the Minister in the chair Ron Mark to provide any further explanation or clarification in relation to that. But perhaps in relation to clause 9A—the exceptions—some further guidance would in fact be useful.The four subclauses to this clause naturally enough start with the words " 'Section 9' does not apply" and so forth—being exceptions of course to what would otherwise be the requirements for registration and permitting. The first such exception is that for a person who carries out a brokering activity as defined if they're doing so in relation to dual-use goods—again as defined—and take reasonable steps to ensure that they won't be used for a prohibited use then that's a sufficient exception to avoid prosecution under the Act—as it will become in due course no doubt. So my question to the Minister in the chair—whom I acknowledge is the Minister of Defence which is not technically the sponsor of the bill therefore but in an area that is related—is what meaning does he think might be accorded to the phrase "reasonable steps" within clause 9A(1)(b)?If I were to hazard a guess subject to such confirmation I would say that reasonable steps indicate that an objective standard is implied there. So the determination about whether reasonable steps have been taken to ensure that the dual-use goods won't be used for a prohibited use would be in the mind of the decision maker in the shoes of a reasonable person as he or she would no doubt be considered to be. So whether there are any criteria that might guide such determination is something that I think would be useful to canvass. I acknowledge the new Minister in the chair Carmel Sepuloni and hope that I will be able to have an answer from her perhaps in due course.The next subclause being subclause (2) of clause 9A again starts with the phrase "Section 9 does not apply" but this time the exception relates to brokering activity from a place outside New Zealand. I think the meaning of that's probably clear enough and it talks also about compliance with an equivalent overseas regime and of course the structure of that subclause is that both elements must be satisfied for this exception to apply because of the word "and" rather than "or" for example having being used.More interesting I think perhaps is clause 9A(3) yet another exception which talks about reasonable grounds again. In this case it's where a person has carried out a brokering activity but on behalf of their employer. So the reasonableness and the objective standards in this case apply to whether there were reasonable grounds for the person carrying out the activity to believe that the employer had complied with an equivalent overseas regime."