Hipango HareteHARETE HIPANGO (National—Whanganui): Thank you for the opportunity to address the House in the second reading of this. It's interesting that members in the House the Government particularly are grand at the blame game often lack good grace and graciousness and speak loudly about kindness—talks up the wellbeing care and kindness—but somehow lack the sense of decorum to exhibit that.So moving now on to the bill. Just in terms of the process one has to question the due diligence in the care associated with the tiaki promise that's espoused under this tourism brand from the Government. The tiaki promise is about acting with care and manaakitanga. One questions whether this bill actually does that.So talking about due care and diligence I refer specifically to the provisions of the bill and also the risk impact statement which my colleagues have also mentioned. I turn again to page 9 where it talks about the process of consultation. It's quite apparent based on the advice from the officials that there were two rounds of consultation. That was held in July 2018. However stated very emphatically and quite clearly and again to be emphasised and restated in the House this evening is that further targeted consultation is planned—further targeted consultation is planned—which is clearly indicative that the officials were of the view that this due process ought to be adhered to. Well regrettably it hasn't and regrettably that has to question the integrity not only of the process but the haste and the speed with which this bill is being introduced under urgency.It's also indicative in terms of the gaps and the lapses that are obviously and identifiably noted within this bill. It's a hastily drafted bill and there are flaws that my colleagues here this evening have addressed.I challenged the Minister at the first reading of the bill around the collection of this levy and how that's going to go back into the pockets and the pukus of our tourist operators out in the regions. The Minister is of the view that that's going to be done. However it's not stated here within this bill and I make it very clear and emphatic again that under the proposed section 399A(5) in clause 7 All levy money collected under this section must be paid into a Crown Bank Account."—a consolidated fund. There's nothing there specifically in the bill that states there will be an allocation of these funds out to those tourist operators. It is purely at the discretion of whoever is making the decision. There is no compulsion. There's no transparency. There's no accountability.So the Government talks the big game. When things break down it points the finger and blames. It's time to step up and to honour that tiaki promise all about care and due diligence.So I also turn to the part within the impact statement. The Minister had stated and sought to justify why there is an exemption to the Australian market the Australian tourist operator. It was stated that there is concern that there's a choice of other countries that the Australians may prefer to go to because of the cost imperatives. Well precisely. That is the very reason why this side the National Party is arguing against the imposition of this tiaki tax to the international visitor: for the very reason that it will be a disincentive to pay to travel so far to come and then to be met our manuhiri to be greeted with a tax.I conclude by saying that this bill as it's proposed is a tiaki promise to tax our manuhiri. There's no tick from this side of the House on that tiaki tax promise."