Davidson Marama; Tisch LindsayMARAMA DAVIDSON (Green): Tēnā koutou. The Green Party is opposing this bill because we support the public benefit that occurs as a result of public organisations—like the 138349 requests from education agencies in 2013-14—who need police vetting. That is absolutely a public benefit and should not be carried by a user-pays model. It appears that this bill wants to enable police to recover costs in respect of the provision of certain police services. The process is that the Minister can recommend any regulation to establish a fee or charge. Again I acknowledge my colleague David Clendon as our spokesperson proper on this legislation. But it appears still in my initial reading that there are not enough safety checks or a check on how far the police can expand the services that they wish to cost recover. So that is of some concern.As well as this the police apparently have suggested a fee and provision for some exemptions for specific organisations for recovering costs but as of August it seems that any proposed regulations still have not been presented to Cabinet. I am happy to be corrected on that and I just seek some clarification that we might get on that in the Committee stage—so some sort of clarity around what the police are actually suggesting here and how many services they are wanting to expand the recovery costs to as well.I want to be quite clear—I mean as I mentioned this absolutely should not be a user-pays model. That is not where we want our country to go for so many reasons and one that sprang to my mind as I familiarised myself with this new piece of legislation was my experience when I went to a smaller school in Hokianga. It was a lower-decile school and not hugely resourced and I was involved in an investigation of a teacher. I was basically a whistleblower with regard to a teacher—this is all on the public record; I was probably 10—who was conducting some serious sexual abuse of my fellow students at my school. This was a small quite isolated school at that point as well and you know we need—we need—our schools to not even have to think about doing the checks the safety requirements that they need to do without a single thought because it actually literally does impact on the safety of the children in that community.As I pointed out earlier a large number of the requests for police vetting come from educational agencies. Surely with the resources of this Crown and this ministry and the Minister involved we can actually work out how we can exempt particular public-good services. If there is a concern about commercial benefit then let us have a look at that but let us not scoop up too many of the organisations that would actually have to think—the fact that they would even have to think about taking the necessary steps to put in place all safety requirements for their community is why we oppose this bill.My colleague David Clendon has noted that the better-off schools for example often pay for their teachers' registration but poor schools do not. So we have the evidence to show that these are hindrances and these are restrictions and we need to ensure that every single school—all schools—early childhood centres and charity organisations do not have to think and do not have another barrier in the way of the work that they are already doing in our communities to be able to ensure that they can keep their workers safe their communities safe and their clients safe. And primarily that is why the Green Party is opposing this bill. Thank you.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Chris Hipkins—5 minutes.