Dean JacquiHon JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): National cannot support this bill. While we certainly agree with the aims and intention of this bill and supported the bill through to the Governance and Administration Committee—and had a good select committee process over several months heard a number of submissions and gave it very full consideration—we can't support this bill because it's not good enough.It is my belief that the Government have taken on face some pretty loose provisions in this bill. It's a blind faith in my view given that this tribunal is a judicial tribunal which has quite strong powers. It is independent and it is a judicial body. Yes it does provide an alternative pathway for dispute resolution and particularly resolving outstanding Earthquake Commission (EQC) claims of which there are still several thousand. But the process that the Government has settled on in our view is not strong enough is not good enough and not robust enough. I'm just going to highlight one provision which we strongly argued against in select committee and still strongly believe is a measure that has taken the Government down the wrong path and I'll explain why I am of that view.So in terms of the appointment of the tribunal members the Government has taken the view and we argued against it that the Governor-General on the recommendation of the Minister of Justice appoint members to the tribunal only one of whom is required to be legally trained and with seven years practice. This is and I'll say it again a tribunal with judicial powers and has the ability to make awards to the same degree that a court can order or it can award general damages or costs against a party. So for members of the Government to say to this House that it is not necessary to have legal training to sit as a member of this tribunal I think is false thinking and I also think it's dangerous. It is putting blind faith in tribunal members who may well be qualified in their field of engineering—most likely to be engineering or perhaps building and construction that sort of thing. But without the discipline of legal training and being mindful of the power of the tribunal and its ability to award damages and costs I think that this is failing those very people who this legislation seeks to serve because there is not potentially enough rigour enough legal nous and expertise to deal with these sometimes complex highly emotional claims that will be brought before them.Again I say I think this is a matter of blind faith. I also think that and I quote the members must be only people who in the Minister's opinion are suitable to be appointed as members taking into account their knowledge skills and experience". Now I know a number of lawyers—I've got one in my life—they're not just lawyers particularly lawyers who have had considerably more than seven years' practising experience. People who are legally trained are also other things. They are also very familiar particularly if they are domiciled in Christchurch or in the Canterbury region—they too have potentially vast experience in these EQC matters and claims on behalf of the clients. So to exclude them I think is short-sighted and I think it is selling the people of Christchurch short."