Hudson Brett: Standards and Accreditation Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHudson Brett: Standards and Accreditation Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 13 October 2015. Volume:709;Page:7191. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRETT HUDSON (National): I rise in support of the Standards and Accreditation Bill in this its third reading. This bill is aimed at supporting our Business Growth Agenda to raise the prospects of Kiwis and their families. It provides structures processes and supports to help our businesses grow and compete both at home and abroad. Standards will improve the effectiveness safety and reliability of many goods and services used by consumers and businesses every day and throughout the economy. The proposed changes are aimed at ensuring that our standards system is well functioning and importantly meets the needs of businesses regulators and consumers. A well-managed standards system builds innovation by facilitating the creation and diffusion of technology by codifying technical excellence. What this bill will do is create a statutorily independent Standards Approval Board and similarly a statutorily independent Standards Executive one that among other things will be responsible for appointing independent standards development committees.It is somewhat unfortunate hearing again tonight the Opposition try to claim that this bill somehow weakens the independence of standards in New Zealand when it does exactly the opposite. If members had actually read or comprehended the bill they would understand that in clauses 8 and 12 the bill is very clear that both the Standards Executive and the Standards Approval Board must act independently.Simon O’Connor: Which clauses?BRETT HUDSON: Clauses 8 and 12. Somewhat more regrettably at the Committee stage a member of the Labour Opposition Stuart Nash seized upon one subclause that he said he believed showed that actually the Standards Executive would be at the behest of the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment’s chief executive officer. Never mind the fact that that subclause related only to elements that were not about the core functions of the executive’s role such as ensuring that we meet our international obligations that development committees are properly put together and that they actually discharge the work of the standards appropriately and relate it to consequential impacts or conditions from other enactments. Never mind that—he simply meant that because it was there in some form that would weaken independence. As I say it was a shame those members either did not read or comprehend the bill.But then of course there is also the real world that they have also missed out on. So again tonight we heard Ms Curran talking about how the Standards Executive being resident in the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment would somehow weaken its independence. Well neither she nor any of the submitters raised the Registrar of Companies the Commissioner of Patents or the Official Assignee—each of which is a statutorily independent officer resident actually within Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment. In the real world these officers are able to discharge their duties and act independently. It was Daniel Patrick Moynihan who pointed out that although people are entitled to their own opinions they are not entitled to their own facts. Labour members clearly seem to think differently.The reality is that this bill is a great measure to help support our businesses grow and compete in New Zealand and abroad. I commend it to the House.James Shaw: Mr Assistant Speaker.