Willis ScottSCOTT WILLIS (Green): Thank you Mr Speaker. I was talking with my nephew earlier today who's a partner in a small business called SpicyBoys. They make some fantastic chilli sauce in Christchurch and I recommend that to the other members of the House; it really gets you going. And I would like the members opposite to get going on something that will save small business on something that will help small business thrive something that will help our small to medium sized enterprises to function well and continue to be productive and ensure that they get paid on time because the repeal of this bill does not improve productivity. The Government has no plan to help small business thrive in challenging economic times. We've heard that there's seven or maybe nine points coming but as usual the Government is ignoring those who are doing it hard now—and those who take risks those who are the innovators those who are really trying hard—and it is rewarding the slackers the big businesses who simply want to screw their customers. I can't comprehend why you would want to do that. Why as my colleague Helen White mentioned you would want to favour the corporates the very very wealthy the big businesses who can afford so easily to do right by their customers. Some of them do but many of them don't and that makes it extremely hard for small to medium sized enterprises to function.So we've heard that e-invoicing is going to be one of the solutions. E-invoicing is not an innovation; it's been around for 20 years. And what's more it's not a solution. Why has it not been implemented? Independent research by Kordia today gives us some reasons as to why: more than two-thirds of people using e-invoicing experienced an impact from a cyber incident with nearly half 46 percent finding it took more than a month to resolve the incident including 9 percent saying it took more than five months. E-invoicing is not a solution. Moreover 70 percent of business leaders say they would consider paying a ransom to a cyber-criminal. But the Government's telling us that they could not deal with a business payments programme. I mean what's wrong here? We have heard so many good ideas. We've heard a willingness to discuss to ensure that we can have something better and all we've heard is a tribal retrenchment into an urgent debate over something that is not that consequential but is going to make such a big difference to small business. And this to me just seems ridiculous. Why would you want to hold the line on this through urgency when you could reach across the aisle and start to talk put it into select committee let us hear from those small businesses document at least who you've spoken to and let us engage on this rather than simply being tribal about it? There's so much more you could do and yet you seem unwilling. Isn't the Government tired of simply rejecting things? Isn't it time to invest in some solutions? Don't you get tired of saying no? Don't you get tired of breaking stuff? It is so hard to make things. It's so hard but much more valuable and much more rewarding to create to bring joy to people to give security to small businesses and small to medium sized enterprises. You could do this if are willing if you had the political will.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O'Connor): Mr Willis when you say you" you're addressing the Chair. You probably mean "members across the other side" or terms to that effect.SCOTT WILLIS: Indeed I do Mr Speaker and thank you for that reminder. I'm still getting used to the process in the House and every so often I get carried away. However we do have an opportunity and I do hope that this is not the end that there is something better that comes out of the process. But given the quality of the argument that I've heard from the Government I think as an optimist I will yet again be disappointed.I do think that we have heard a lot in a short time but we haven't heard a lot of common sense from the opposite side and that is really disappointing. I simply would like the Government to consider what the Government and the party opposite has heard from this side of the House: the willingness to engage the desire to find a solution for our small to medium sized enterprises for those people who are doing it hard those people who are the backbone of business in New Zealand those people we care about but clearly you don't. But we would like you to care—we would like you to care. We would like you to care about business. Hon Marama Davidson: We would like "them" to care.SCOTT WILLIS: We would like the members opposite to care. And thank you for the reminder from my colleagues over there; we're getting used to it. And if they do care we can work together through a select committee process. We can work together and we can hear from small business who would love to contribute to something better than this dog's breakfast of a repeal. Kia ora."