Hipkins ChrisHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister for the Public Service): I think just to pick up the theme of a few of the questions that have just been brought forward one of the purposes of clarifying the definition of serious wrongdoing" is to ensure that it is very clear that it extends to private sector use of public funds and authority. Of course the protected disclosures regimes has predominantly up until this point been focused on private sector entities Government departments and agencies. We have to recognise that the trend over the last 30 or 40 years has been to see greater partnership with the private sector with the non-Government organisation sector and in some cases they are exercising authority on behalf of the Government and they are spending public funds. So making sure that the protected disclosures regime applies to those activities is really important. So that's been one of the drivers actually—one of the drivers not the only one—behind the definitional changes that this legislation makes.JAN LOGIE (Green): Thank you. I just I guess wanted to seek some more clarification from the Minister in terms of the limitations and thank him for the acknowledgment of the limitations of the work so far and whether at this point I might seek some more clarity around what will be included in the next stages. We're clearly hearing that there is more work to be done looking at the nuance around serious misconduct and as the select committee pointed out the interaction with other pieces of legislation. And that did come up as a concern from some submitters and I think the interaction with the Oranga Tamariki Act was one thing that was noted in the select committee report because it was raised by submitters.There's also the further extension to the private sector as the Minister has been discussing and acknowledging as the Minister is saying that a huge number of organisations whether they be building roads unsuccessfully or successfully or whether they're community organisations delivering on behalf of Government. There are a lot of organisations that we have a financial as well as a community interest in ensuring the best integrity of their systems and this piece of legislation is central to that. And local government is also not fully covered as we would like to see in terms of this legislation and that is an area where—like I guess every area—if we assume that everything is going to be fine problems arise because actually we're not doing the work to make sure that nothing goes wrong.And then there is the independent oversight body that's been called for. There are the sanctions for organisations that retaliate. And then there is the better access to compensation for people who are retaliated against. Then there's the extending of the work the public sector has done around modelled standards which we'll get to in Part 3. So I'd love to know if all of those things are on the Minister's schedule for the next stage and what time frame are we going to expect those? And sorry one other point with that—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): I call Jan Logie.JAN LOGIE: Thank you Madam Chair.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): A whole new speech!JAN LOGIE: I forgot my final clincher! It was the recommendation for a five-year review that the select committee recommended to put a time frame around that next stage. I wanted it as three years but the committee was recommending five. I was disappointed to see if there's that commitment to the next stage that we haven't got a time frame around it.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister for the Public Service): I have to say as the Leader of the House and someone who's been through a number of these debates I'm not a particular fan of clauses in legislation that require the legislation to be reviewed within a specific time frame. I generally think instead if there is extra work that needs to be done we should get on and do it and sometimes those clauses in fact lead to reviews that aren't a good use of public time energy and resource when actually there can often be other legislative priorities where those resources could be better deployed. So my view is that if the Parliament thinks there is more work to be done the Parliament should ask for more work to be done and that's fine but those kinds of clauses I'm not a fan of.In terms of the issues she's raised though—yes I do acknowledge all of those issues and as I've indicated to her some of those are more complicated and complex than the issues that are contained in this bill. So I think if we're going to do them we need to do them thoroughly. And there are budgetary implications around doing that work because these things don't just happen; they require people and time and money to do them. So I can't give her a specific commitment on time frames around that other than to say I think it's important work and it should be done.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): The question is that the Minister's amendments to Part 2 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 131 be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.Part 2 as amended agreed to."