McKee NicoleNICOLE McKEE (ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. I stand on behalf of the ACT Party and my two colleagues Karen Chhour and Damien Smith who have been part of the select committee process going forward.When I stood to stand for my—stood to stand! When I stood for my second reading speech I spoke to one aspect of this bill and promised that in my third reading I would speak to other aspects within the bill as well. I'd like to start off with some of the positives that we can see in this bill.All sports face some sort of doping or match-fixing issues and this bill is hoping to make those issues administratively tidy. I think that that is really quite important and a good aspect of this bill. We do have the World Anti-Doping League and in fact I've been a part of having to comply with some of the rules and regulations around there. So being able to pull what is the drug agency right now into a new portfolio actually sounds like a really good idea.We also like the idea about the addition of the word people" and the removal of "communities". So we're no longer talking about rainbow communities but rainbow people. It actually becomes that we do integrate everybody not as a community as such but as individuals. And in a lot of our sports that's what we're dealing with individuals in sports rather than communities in sports. So we agree with that change as well.Some sports also face challenges such as being called out on bullying culture in some disciplines and some disciplines are worse than others especially when it comes to our children. Hearing over the discussions tonight that there was some expert commentary especially from Emily Henderson who has worked really hard with children to be able to put that concept into the mind to upgrade the bill to make sure that it is fit for purpose when we're dealing with our kids—some of them in some of the disciplines actually do need to make sure that there is somebody looking after them looking over them and it looks like this will look to address that. But ACT still has concerns about the bill hence our opposition at first and second readings and continued opposition as we come into this the third and final reading.While there are some aspects of the bill that we agree with in what they are trying to achieve we do not believe that creating more Government bureaucracy is actually going to achieve what is needed here. The bill creates a central bureaucracy that writes integrity codes and then it acts as the investigator as well as the judiciary on those matters. It even decides penalty or redress and the costs of implementing their desires is also maintained by them as well. It reminds me of New Zealand Police in the firearms section where they write policy they administer it they enforce it and we have issues there when you just have one agency trying to do all of that work. So we do have legitimate concerns around that.If individual sports don't want to participate in this we're told within the bill that they can opt out of participation. So that's good to see that that's in there. But we do note that there was a time when New Zealand Rugby was fined $280000 and they actually look set to lose $600000 of their funding because they hadn't met the 40 percent gender diversity quota for the make-up of their board. So again we do have a little bit of concern that if people do not opt in to the code there could be some sort of penalty—hopefully not financial—for not doing so. ACT is sceptical that one-size-fits-all and centralised solutions do not always work. So ACT is sceptical of this approach especially when it gives sweeping powers to the commission. More importantly it has not recognised the significance of women and girls in sport especially at a time when we do have the women's football world cup running here. It is strange that women and their plight for fairness in sport has actually been totally ignored in this bill. But we are pleased that women and girls have been included in the bill at select committee. But really? Just as stakeholders and that's it? We could have gone further there and made sure that they have a representative on the board but the Government has decided that women don't need that place there. So it's important that women are not left out and that's our view there. ACT did recommend a Supplementary Order Paper that would include them but as I mentioned Labour have turned it down. ACT also want to protect women's sports. Hence our other amendment directly incorporating section 49 of the Human Rights Act into the bill. I say it's for clarity; it's actually for the parents of young girls out there in our community who are seeking the clarity.The bureaucracy that is coming from Labour at the moment is just absolute madness. We do have integrity issues in sport but we also have Sport New Zealand and we have High Performance Sport New Zealand as well. And rather than creating a whole new layer of bureaucracy there why are we not just sending people in to teach to learn to be a part of these two organisations to ensure that integrity is well and truly embedded within those two organisations?Instead we're just looking to create more bureaucracy more taxpayer money being spent in areas where it could have been lightened if we'd utilise what we already have instead of creating this whole new centre to look at sports. We don't need another bureaucratic arm. We don't need another commission. We have so many of them. When we've put lots of costs lots of taxpayer money into establishing a whole lot of commissions and we have worse outcomes occurring for New Zealanders at the moment I don't see how spending more money is actually going to make a difference.Integrity in sport absolutely needs help and we have two foundations that are already set up at grassroots level. If we offered assistance to those foundations we could actually have an impact because they already know the business. We've done quite well on the world stage in all of our sporting codes without having to have a centralised commission telling us what to do how to do it when to do it and what the punishment is if we don't. We have been successful in our own right.What we need to do is protect the people protect the sportsmen sportswomen and people out there and especially our children. On the issues determined to be too hard like the transgender participation in women's sports that I mentioned the answers throughout the select committee report actually shows that it was an issue. If we are to have a commission then we need to deal with the issues and stop shying away from being able to talk about them; not doing something about them and placing the emphasis back on to international settings. If we're going to have a commission deal with the issues and stop referring back to those international codes we need to if we're going to use a commission actually look at New Zealand regulations for New Zealand sports.I started this third reading speech by commenting on some of the good things that this bill can achieve. But the reality is it's just another bureaucratic arm of this Government telling New Zealanders what they can and cannot do how they conduct themselves in sport and how to cause dysfunction among existing agencies. We cannot support this bill on that basis."