Edmonds BarbaraBARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's always quite difficult to go after a speech that is loud in volume but not loud in solution. Andrew Bayly the National member who's just sat down said that this bill is a solution looking for a problem. So let me set out in the third reading of this bill what the problems are that this bill is trying to solve because unlike the other side of the House the Labour Party stands up for consumers. It stands up for those small people who are consumers being sold insurance policies that they are ineligible to claim upon. We stand up for those customers who have sales incentives that lead them to being sold products that they don't need or that don't suit them. We stand up for life insurance customers who've been churned from one policy to another policy which can result in a loss of their cover. We stand up for people and consumers where there is poor accountability in the financial institutions in which they invest their money. That is what the Labour Party and what this side of the House is standing up for.If the other side of the House doesn't believe us then have a look at a couple of the reviews that actually said there are problems here. The Financial Markets Authority (FMA) and the Reserve Bank conduct and culture reviews identified evidence of poor conduct but more broadly serious risks and regulatory gaps in our financial system. Again if you don't believe the Reserve Bank and if you don't believe the Financial Markets Authority how about you believe the International Monetary Fund? The International Monetary Fund said they identified gaps in our regulatory system in the way that our insurers conduct themselves and it recommended that we fill those gaps and that's exactly what the Minister said in his speech. New Zealand has been an outlier internationally—an outlier internationally—in not having conduct regulation of banking and insurance services. Again this bill will fill that gap. It's unfortunate. The member on the other side of the House who said that he sat and he listened and he was vigorous in his contribution and interactions as part of this bill process—well unfortunately he failed to listen to the committee of the whole House debate where the Minister clearly outlined that a small sample was taken by the FMA and the Reserve Bank and that there are about 10 insurers with a total remediation of $1.4 million. Now $1.4 million may not be an issue for Andrew Bayly but it is for consumers. It is for the working people of New Zealand so that's why this side of the House is filling that regulatory gap. That's why this side of the House agrees with the International Monetary Fund that we are an outlier and there is regulation that needs to be filled and so are coming up with solutions. Again if the members on the other side of the House actually paid attention and looked at the bill they would notice that there is one very clear safety gap and it was a small change made by the Finance and Expenditure Committee which was to have a statutory review in five years' time. So therefore whenever they decide to come back into Government and whenever they decide to unpick a whole lot of changes that are about consumer protection wait for the five years after this bill has been passed wait for that statutory review because the Financial Markets Authority the Reserve Bank and the International Monetary Fund all believe there's a gap. They all believe that this needs to be changed. This side of the House is committed to consumer protection and therefore I commend this bill to the House.