Hudson BrettBRETT HUDSON (National): Thank you Mr Chair. Unlike my esteemed colleague Mr McKelvie I think this bill does merit a name change because the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2018-19 Modernising Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Bill 2018 may seem applicable to some although as Mr McKelvie has just pointed out with all the retrospective elements of the commencement date it doesn't seem quite right—that 2018-19 doesn't describe the effect of the bill. But actually I think there's an opportunity here. We could rename this the Taxation (Simplification of Taxation) Bill 2018" because I am aware—I am aware—that there is a Standing Order that does prevent irony in question time in questions but I'm not aware of a Standing Oder that prevents irony in the naming of bills because if there's one thing that this monstrosity—I mean carefully crafted document—is not it is not a simplification of our taxation system. And after all if we want compliance both in personal income tax and business tax and all the vast and myriad ways that taxation touches on the lives of people of businesses of trusts then surely simplification would be a goal that we should set ourselves to and particularly we should set the Inland Revenue Department to? Certainly their Business Transformation programme was supposed to be all about that simplification. Perhaps we could send a message? I think the Rt Hon Winston Peters once used that term—"send a message". We could rename this bill the "Taxation (Simplification of Taxation) Bill 2018".The other part that is very relevant and Mr McKelvie did raise this looking through this there are just so many different commencement dates here. For a member of the public—and let's face it they are the people who will actually be affected by this if it is enacted and based on previous votes tonight it looks like that is a danger for them—when and if this is enacted it is poor old New Zealanders who will have to deal with this and the only ones who are going to win out of this particular commencement clause are accountants and lawyers.My guess as Mr McKelvie noted and if it wasn't for a case of certain retrospectivity—by the way Mr Chair having spent a short but very interesting four and a bit years in this Chamber I can well recall when members of every other party would scream blue murder at the merest hint of retrospectivity in legislation that the Government brought before the House. Like sheep mild; not a mutter not a murmur not a thing. I mean this is an absolute myriad of strangeness to try and work through. I think as Mr McKelvie pointed out maybe some of it has got to do with making sure that good-looking horses that were good looking a little while ago are still going to give their owners some sort of tax credit.I think there is still time. The bill is not through the committee stage; the Minister could support an amendment to change the name to the "Taxation (Simplification of Tax) Bill" and perhaps something—anything quite frankly; it's such a mess—to simplify these commencement clauses because I'd argue that this is a difficult thing for New Zealanders to try to get their heads around unless they are charging by the hour as tax consultants accountants or lawyers."