Paraone Pita: Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParaone Pita: Subordinate Legislation (Confirmation and Validation) Bill (No 3) — First Reading[Sitting date: 11 October 2007. Volume:642;Page:12331. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PITA PARAONE (NZ First):Tēnā koe Mr Deputy Speaker. On behalf of New Zealand First I am participating in this debate. I can say on a personal note that I have landed the privilege or opportunity to make a contribution on behalf of my party because I am the duty member at this point of time. When I found that I was required to speak to this bill I tried to get some information. I rang one or two offices and in particular the office of the Minister of Fisheries but I have to say that I had some difficulty in getting some information out of that office as to what this bill was all about. I thought to myself well I am a member of this Parliament and a member of a party that has a confidence and supply agreement with the Government but I am having some difficulty in getting information. So I decided that it was only proper for New Zealand First to support this bill going to a select committee in order to give the people of New Zealand the opportunity to have their say on it.We have heard that this is merely technical legislation and a routine and annual bill. But on listening to the contributions that have been made by previous speakers I think this bill is more than just routine and annual given the importance of some of the legislation that it covers.I want to speak particularly in relation to the New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Act 2001 and the Social Security Act 1964 which this bill covers. My interest of course is in regard to the increase in superannuation to 66 percent of the average wage. It should not come as any surprise to this House that New Zealand First was responsible for that increase. But what concerns me is the fact that the previous speaker made a comment—and I am not saying he is wrong—that a lot of legislation particularly new legislation that has come to this House has lacked proper financial analysis. He said that the benefits of legislation should be weighed up against the costs. When I heard that I asked myself how the costs are measured and how the benefits are measured. I know that the previous speaker was making reference to financial costs but I want to talk about social costs. I know that all the superannuitants of New Zealand irrespective of which party they might support would certainly want their increase to be measured in terms of not only financial costs but social costs. In respect of New Zealand First I can say that we will be interested to hear the debate in the select committee process on this particular issue.The other part of this bill that we are certainly interested in—and particularly me from a personal aspect—is the amendment to the Fisheries Act 1996. I was able to find out that it is regarded as a mere amendment in relation to the South Island’s West Coastpāua stock and involves a reduction in catch from the present 1 tonne to 100 kilograms.I take on board the concerns expressed in terms of consultation with those involved in the industry and I am making reference not just to the importance thatMaōri fisheries contribute to this particular industry but also to the wider public especially the recreational and ordinary fishers who avail themselves of the resource that Tangaroa is able to produce for them.I do not need to take too long because I have already indicated that New Zealand First will be supporting this legislation going to a select committee. We hope the people of New Zealand will take the opportunity to avail themselves of the benefits that the select committee process provides in terms of expressing any concerns they might have. In closing I reaffirm New Zealand First’s support for this bill to be referred to a select committee.