Bates Carl; Pugh Maureen; Bennett Glen; Bidois DanCARL BATES (National—Whanganui): Thank you Madam Chair for the opportunity to take a call on this bill. I've got a number of questions from a technical perspective on this bill. Hopefully they have been considered through the process. I know that this is a good bill and the sort of thing that we need to have changed. I was looking on my counter this morning at a gift card and I actually don't know when it expires. So I am worried about that which leads to my first question because I know that we need to keep this focused on the bill. But as I say I have a number of questions that might take me more than one call to ask them all.The first is: did the member consider in this process having different expiry dates based on the value of a gift card? I'm thinking of the card on my table at home. I think it's a $20 one I was given. I understand if that needs to be a bit quicker—it could be a year could be two years could be three years—but a longer expiry for the larger-value gift card such as the one mentioned by my learned colleague the member Rangitata.This leads into my second question and a concern I have around the bill as a chartered accountant from a financial perspective from the perspective of annual financial accounts: how much consideration and testing occurred around the compliance costs that this will add to business? Because if it's a year that you have for a gift card being expired or expiring then there's an argument to say it's immaterial if it's not included in the accounts of a small business at the end of their financial year. But if it's three years how much thought was given? And I'm really asking this question not to challenge the bill and the fairness and the core of the bill but rather to get guidance from the member to small business owners listening to this inquisitive parliamentary session this afternoon about the implementation of the bill post it being passed by this House—maybe not this evening but in due course. So what testing occurred around the compliance cost that would be added? Did for example the Australia New Zealand institute of chartered accountants submit on the bill and the cost that would be incurred around consideration? Was there any thought given to what would have to be provided as evidence to back up the liability that will now sit on the balance sheet of businesses? So that really is part of my second question related to new section 36WC The expiry date must appear" and how that relates to liability.Turning then as part of that thinking to the role of startups. And I know our Minister of Finance is very keen for us to be encouraging business. We need more business to support the productivity growth we need in this country after six years of challenge. And I'm just concerned whether or not any consideration was given to the mental wellbeing of people who are looking to start up businesses and the infringement-offence regime that will be brought in with this and whether there's an ability to differentiate. I'd be happy to provide an Amendment Paper if the member was supportive of this sort of thinking to allow that start-up that new business those people that are taking some money from friends for a voucher for something that they're looking to get going to have a little bit more flexibility as to how they go on the journey of starting business versus the larger organisations the corporates the franchises that have a much more organised system for the management of gift vouchers and cards. And I'm thinking about this in the context of when I advised businesses. I might need to take another call on my other questions. But in my prior role when I advised businesses one of the things I always said to them was "If you can't get people to buy what you are promising what you're looking to do then maybe it's not a good idea." And often a voucher would be a way of doing that of starting that journey. And so I am genuinely concerned about the difference between the startup businesses and the larger companies.CHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh): Before I take the next call can I just say this is quite a small piece of legislation and the scenarios are very nice to hear but I think we're drifting quite wide of the mark. And I'll just ask members to come back to the specifics in the bill.GLEN BENNETT (Labour): I move That debate on this question now close.CHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh): Before I take the closure motion I'm just warning members that we need new material. Otherwise I will take a closure. Carl Bates—if you've got further questions.CARL BATES (National—Whanganui): Madam Chair I have one last point and I will make it quick. I will make it quick. In relation to the "gift card" definition—and it's noted here that it means "means a card or voucher" etc. and I won't read out the full definition. But I did have three questions related to that around what it excluded or included because in my mind a card is something physical. And so I wanted to ask: does the definition of "gift card" include virtual gift cards or are they excluded? It doesn't say they're excluded.Glen Bennett: Repetition. We've asked that.CARL BATES: This is new. It doesn't say they're excluded but it doesn't also say they're included. So I did want to clarify in terms of the intent of the legislation.The second part of the gift card question relates a little to what the MP for Rangitata said before around the international context. But if a voucher is sold in New Zealand is there a distinction between a domestic gift card—so one for a domestic business—and for example if I was to go online and buy an international music voucher for my wonderful wife to say "I love you" this evening would that be included in the definition of "gift card"?Those were my questions. I don't have any new material other than those questions but I would appreciate answers from the honourable member to the questions I have raised this evening. Thank you.DAN BIDOIS (National—Northcote): Thank you Madam Chair. I wish to thank the member from the Whanganui electorate Carl Bates for his thoughtful questions; I know this comes from a place of strong advocacy in his local electorate. The questions that he raised around different expiry dates for different values: we didn't consider this and it would actually make the bill very difficult to enforce. So for simplicity terms we just want one blanket expiry date that all businesses and that all industries can adhere to when looking after and issuing gift cards. The second is around testing compliance costs for businesses. So the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee didn't really get specific advice around it but we did ask submitters around the likely costs. Firstly most if not all businesses in the select committee process were very very supportive of having a standardised and consistent process for the expiration of gift cards. When we inquired about what are the types of costs that businesses face the largest cost was really around the physical gift cards that are already in circulation. So that is why the select committee chose to make the transition period long enough so that those organisations that produce and sell gift cards have enough time to clear their backlog—and some companies actually have quite a substantial amount of gift cards in their production facilities—to make sure that they can get rid of those gift cards and prepare the new regime going forward. The other costs that we explored was certainly around the training requirements involved the IT systems as well and the physical systems around the recording of the expiry date in the gift cards as well. The member raised points around mental wellbeing of start-ups and whether the infringement fees impinge on that. The infringement fee that was mentioned is an "up to" limit and that accounts for the size and the extent of such an offence in New Zealand. So if you were a small business and you were caught selling gift cards then the authorities and your regulator will be able to take that into account and penalise you in the order of the magnitude of such an offence and the size of the business. But then on the other hand if there are in fact businesses for example large corporates who display a recurring and ongoing flout of the law then the regulator will be able to take that into account as well. So that is why it is an "up to" figure. Certainly it doesn't look good when you read the law but the good news for this House is that most small businesses and start-ups don't read the laws. They just get out there and they just start up a business and they read the laws retrospectively when they're required to. So that addresses this issue. The last question the member had was around the inclusion of online gift cards and as I previously stated with the honourable member Glen Bennett online gift cards are actually included in the definition of this bill; that is included in the definition because of the nature of more and more gift cards being issued. Thank you."