Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Well thank you Madam Chair. It's a pleasure to speak on the Friendly Societies and Credit Unions (Regulatory Improvements) Amendment Bill. I want to commend the member in charge Stuart Smith for bringing this bill. Many members don't presently have a member's bill either in the ballot or before the House and many that do have quite simple and some might even uncharitably say trivial bills before the House but Stuart Smith has taken on a substantial and quite technical challenge in reforming a very old piece of legislation that is essential to the operation of a significant part of our financial sector—being friendly societies and credit unions. So I commend Stuart for doing so.I just make another background observation: some people believe that a free society is one that consists only of individuals acting independently. Actually a free society is one where individuals come together and create all manner of institutions to solve collectively problems that they cannot solve by themselves. This Parliament is one such institution that has evolved over a long period of time to solve collectively a group of problems that are difficult to solve individually. I might go further and say that the Parliament's possibly gone a bit beyond the original brief but nevertheless that is the intention.When it comes to friendly societies and credit unions they are a particular type of institution that people have come together and formed in order solve certain problems: how do people in small communities—as Jacqui Dean recently referred—access financial services that larger incorporated banks may not wish to serve; how do people break through any trust issues they may have with the financial sector especially after some of the bank failures of last century to have a financial institution that they feel they can trust? Indeed friendly societies and credit unions are important institutions in our society that have solved a lot of problems for people and I commend Stuart Smith for bringing to the House a bill that will improve the legislative framework under which they operate in this country.I'd also like to speak to Supplementary Order Paper 40 an amendment in my name the genesis of which is that while there are many enthusiasts for Stuart Smith's bill—some of them actually based in the Epsom electorate and I've heard from them extensively—there are also a significant number of credit unions which in fact represent about half of all of the New Zealanders who subscribe to this kind of institution and they are not in favour of being compelled to incorporate. These institutions tell us that in actual fact they will face costs that to some very small institutions will be greater than their annual surplus—there'll be significant compliance costs imposed upon them that they cannot realistically bear.I just ask in the spirit of a free society and people being able to form institutions to solve their problems: where is the right in us as a House of Parliament in imposing costs that will be ruinous to institutions that are working for the people? I put it to submitters and my fellow members of the Finance and Expenditure Committee and also to Stuart Smith when this bill was examined that actually it might be possible to have it both ways.So with that background I present this Supplementary Order Paper. Members may be alarmed at the considerable length. There are actually bills that come before this committee that are shorter than the Supplementary Order Paper I'm presenting to the committee tonight. Let me give some explanation as to why it is so important that we put forward a Supplementary Order Paper that modifies just about every clause of the original bill. The reason for that is that if there was simply to be an exemption saying that the requirement to incorporate does not require—[Time expired]