van Velden BrookeHon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety): Thank you—thank you Madam Chair. I wanted to touch on a few comments quickly. Duncan Webb had a number of questions. He talked firstly about whether we had explored a range of other options. My focus has been on firstly repealing this legislation as that has been our commitment through the coalition agreement. That has been also our commitment to the 100-day plan. Once this system is repealed I will then focus my efforts on to next steps and I look forward to his engagement on those in coming months.There was concern about whether or not we'd had sufficient time to consult on this law. There has been a wide range of consultation on this law. We firstly had the law in effect have a consultation period when we went through the fair pay agreement (FPA) legislation the first time round. We had a very wide public consultation during the election process. We have also two days after I was sworn in at Government met with both Business New Zealand and the Council of Trade Unions which represent the unions and businesses that represent both sides of this agreement and argument. But most importantly we do have a clear mandate from the public from people who voted for this Government to repeal this law.The third question is whether or not there has been analysis done on the cost-benefits of this repeal and I am delighted to inform the member that yes there have been costs and benefits analysed by the Ministry for Business Innovation and Employment. That was done in the 2021 regulatory impact statement but if you look at page 2 of the cover sheet to the fair pay agreements regulatory impact statement that was finalised on 28 November 2023 it does state that there was an exemption granted on the grounds that the regulatory impact statement produced when the FPA system was introduced in 2021 mostly duplicates the analysis needed to repeal the system. So there was no need for a complete new regulatory impact statement considering that most of this information already existed in a regulatory impact statement on this particular law. Updates were provided where that was relevant and that was in the cover sheet.The fourth question was about whether or not the drafting met the Legislation Design and Advisory Committee's guidelines for legislative drafting and procedure. Those were considered during drafting. The guidelines relate to good lawmaking and they were considered throughout the policy development and the drafting of this bill.Ricardo Menéndez March asked whether or not we had considered children and considered what impact this law would have on children within New Zealand. I consider that the fair pay agreements system is a blunt tool that affects all employees and all employers within scope within a particular industry and that would negatively impact on businesses which would negatively impact on employees which would negatively impact therefore on their families. So yes we have considered the effect of what that would be on not just business but employees families and all people involved in our labour market and their wider communities.We have a question from Helen White and it was relating to another amendment on the Table in the name of another member about whether or not we'd review the system after three years. Because there have not been any fair pay agreements in effect it would be impossible to review what a system that had never been in place would look like after three years in order to review what the difference between two systems could be. So we disagree with that amendment.