Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Helensville): Thank you Mr Chair. On this Part 7 looking at different kinds of disputes and how they might be dealt with I thought I'd just focus briefly on a couple of different provisions within the bill. One is the power of the trustee to refer a matter to alternative dispute resolution. It's a pretty helpful thing that the bill does in clarifying the terms on which or the situations in which a trust—various key players: trustees and beneficiaries and so forth—might actually go to the court as is dealt with in a later clause or perhaps more helpfully often in many cases to alternative dispute resolution.Clause 138 for example sets out the times at which that particular section would apply: that would be if there isn't anything set out in very clear detail in the trust deed itself that requires a trustee to refer a matter to an alternative dispute resolution process. So that's the situation that would arise: that the trustees would turn to the legislation and indeed to some manner of alternative dispute resolution and that would then be able to take place if the trustee with each party to the matter agreed to do it to refer the matter in that way and then it goes out to clarify that a beneficiary isn't a party to an external matter—the external matter" phrase being a term that's defined specifically where parties are a trustee and one or more third parties. The meaning of that is pretty clear from the legislation so I'll spend no further time on that one.It did occur to me as being interesting that in clause 140 it deals with the power of a court to order an ADR—alternative dispute resolution—process for an internal matter. Again "internal matter" is defined. That is where a party would include a trustee and one or more beneficiaries or multiple trustees. In that situation it would be possible to go to the court to get an order that an alternative dispute resolution process would then be followed. So sort of two steps forward and one step back so to speak but it's important to have mechanisms that do provide clarity in situations that otherwise aren't provided for and the legislation is at pains to do that and I think commendably so. The commendation is due to those who have drafted it those who've examined it and those who across the House are now supporting it.Lest this be my last contribution on the bill as a whole I'll just quickly note that at a prior reading of the bill with your indulgence Mr Mark Patterson was speaking very eloquently on the bill and actually referred to a historical situation where a particular All Black scored a winning try in some test match I think it was—Mark Patterson: Peter Jones.CHRIS PENK: —Peter Jones; there we go—and the interesting thing is that I was actually contacted by a relative of that man who now has a very senior legal position in-house I think and she'd been watching the parliamentary debate and had heard her relative's name mentioned in it and so she was interested I think to hear that brought up. In any case I will seek no further time of the committee and look forward to the continued discussion from the Minister and again from anyone who might care to join in and I suspect Dr Duncan Webb might be one.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 255 in the name of the Hon Andrew Little to Part 7 be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.Part 7 as amended agreed to."