Russell DeborahDr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour—New Lynn): I would just like to clarify the question another time if I may because if we look at recital (4) of the preamble—so I just want to read it. It says In 2015 the Charities Act 2005 was amended to require that certain charitable entities (those whose total operating payments are $125000 or more in each of the 2 preceding accounting periods) prepare financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice (GAAP)". So that's fine. All that does is specify which charitable entities have to provide financial statements in accordance with GAAP: those whose operating payments are $125000 or more. That certainly specifies—and as I said before I agree with this reason. We all understand that some entities have been required to prepare financial statements in accordance both with GAAP and with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and that for these not-for-profit entities that creates two sets of financial statements that they have to prepare—Priyanca Radhakrishnan: Onerous.Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL: —and that is of course onerous. Yes it's onerous and it means that the compliance costs are significantly increased.Now I'm sorry to repeat this but what I really do need to repeat is the particular question I'm asking to be answered. It's not the fact that the entities have to prepare two sets of financial statements. It's not the fact that one set of financial statements is required by GAAP and the other is required by IFRS; we all understand that. It's not the fact that that creates the compliance costs. What I'm trying to understand—and it is a technical detail—is how the accounting treatment differs between GAAP and IFRS. So there's the top level overall reason and then there's the—you know there's the compliance costs. The next reason is what causes those compliance costs is the difference between GAAP and IFRS. But then I want to understand the actual different treatment within GAAP and within IFRS. What is it in generally accepted accounting principles that differs from International Financial Reporting Standards? I believe one of these speakers on the other side suggested that I would not be interested in an accounting lesson. Actually I'm always interested in accounting lessons. I know that's a bit sad but it's always interesting to find out how things are recorded.Now it is a highly technical thing the differences between GAAP and IFRS and the actual financial treatment of some transactions under GAAP as opposed to those same transactions under IFRS the treatment of the valuation of assets under GAAP say as to the treatment of the valuation of assets under IFRS the valuation of liabilities under GAAP as opposed to the valuation of liabilities under IFRS and so on and on and on and on it goes. It can get quite long and tedious. Actually people do often have to prepare two different sets of financials just because of different accounting treatments. But what actually are those different accounting treatments? And as—CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Can I interrupt the member because it's becoming a bit—Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL: All right. If the member in the chair Dr Parmjeet Parmar could answer—CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): OK. Well I'm still going to say it. I found that rather repetitive. In so far as what the member is saying in terms of the preamble of this bill this bill doesn't alter those standards or explain those standards. It just changes the current accounting proceedings so it's not the member in the chair's responsibility although she did actually address it."