McClay Todd; Rurawhe AdrianHon TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua): Madam Speaker thank you very much. We proudly support this piece of legislation the Regulatory Standards Bill. That last speech in the House is a reason for two things: number one a smaller Parliament and number two the adoption of this piece of legislation because when I have a look at the debate notes I have in front of me—which I'm not reading because it's not a speech—it says that one of the principles of the legislation is not impose a tax except by or under an Act of Parliament. Well the Labour Party has never seen a problem it doesn't think a new tax will solve and it's never seen a regulation it doesn't believe should be in triplicate. Actually the thing about this Parliament is we get to debate long into the night the implications and importance of legislation and the problem with regulation is Parliament doesn't get to debate it; they just give the authority for someone else to set it there is a very small amount of scrutiny and regulation and overbearing regulation actually costs. It costs New Zealanders in their homes it costs them in their businesses and it costs us in the economy.This bill is very straightforward. It is a good thing. It says it should not diminish a person's liberty personal security freedom of choice or action or rights to own use and dispose of [their own] property" by regulation. Well a law might do that but we would have a full debate and a full process. When was the last time a committee in Parliament actually got to debate a regulation in full as it does a law? The point of this is that they don't get to. This draft legislation says "not take or impair property without the consent of the owner unless certain criteria are satisfied". How is it the members opposite think it's a good thing that a Government can pass a regulation or even worse than that that actually as lazy members of Parliament and a lazy Government their Ministers allow their officials to do it to set the regulations and bring them forward? There are lots of Ministers on that side that sign them off because the papers are very large and actually to read through them late at night would be too hard.There is too much regulation in New Zealand. All you've got to do is look at the regulation the Government has passed since the election: costs upon businesses. They say it's good for New Zealanders but actually if we look closer that's why we are now a more expensive country than we've almost been at any time before. It's why the cost of living has gone up so very very much and it's why the costs on businesses is so much that they have to pass them on to consumers—the very people that the Labour Government says they want to help through overbearing regulation. There isn't a problem that this Government and the Labour Party doesn't think you can solve with a new tax and there isn't a regulation they don't like and don't think should be in triplicate.What the Government members should be doing is supporting this so it goes to a select committee so they can argue it out there but they won't because actually they don't get to do that when it comes to a regulation and a bill that would say to this Parliament and to the Government that you can regulate but you need a framework to do it. The public deserves to understand that the regulation is in the best interests of them and that it's not a lazy way to pass law rather than coming to Parliament and actually having the debate so that Kiwis New Zealanders don't get to have their say. They should send it to the committee to discuss it.It's deeply deeply disappointing that every member opposite in Government has stood to speak on this bill and actually talk about why it might or mightn't have been all those years ago because actually 10 years ago when Parliament looked at this it was a good idea it didn't get to pass. It is an even more important idea today because New Zealand has more regulation in place than ever before.Do you know one of the regulations that was passed actually? It says down in the South Island that actually every year an office has to have its entrance checked by the council to decide if it's safe—even ones where the public can't come in—at a cost of at least $1000. Now that might be a well-meaning regulation but if it costs every business $1000 for somebody to show up and check under that regulation if it's safe for the public to come to a place where the public is not allowed to come into it's bad bad regulation. This piece of legislation would solve that. There's not a single problem that Labour doesn't think a tax can't solve and there's not a single regulation they don't think should be in triplicate. It's good legislation. It's disappointing—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member's time has expired."