Pugh MaureenMAUREEN PUGH (National): Thanks very much Madam Deputy Speaker. I stand here today in opposition to the Residential Tenancies (Prohibiting Letting Fees) Amendment Bill in its final reading. We've heard some very interesting contributions from the Labour-led Government today about the banning of letting fees and in her speech Minister Jenny Salesa for the first time admitted that there could be an increase in rentals. This has been argued continuously across the process—that the banning of letting fees would not increase rents. Well the Minister actually admitted it today—that there could be a few dollars' increase in rents as a consequence of this bill. Now it may not sound much to have a few dollars but even if that's say $5 a week those tenants who are the best tenants who settle into long-term rentals of maybe over two years—they're the ones that are going to be penalised the worst because at $5 a week or probably $500 over their tenancy it is going to be an added cost to them. It may not have been the upfront cost but it's certainly going to add to the cost over the term of their tenancy. The Hon Judith Collins made a valuable contribution to this debate earlier this morning and she referred to the standard of rental properties. There is a cause and effect with every decision that is made and what is going to happen here is we're going to take the margin for the landlord off the rental properties. Now of course the landlord is then going to have to find ways of cutting costs. I am almost going to guarantee that what we will see is the downward slide in standards in rental properties and we heard it today from the Hon Judith Collins. We start to get budget equipment installed into properties like the ill-working locks that anyone can push their way into in a Housing New Zealand home. So those increased costs reduce the profit margin for a landlord. We heard from submitters and even the real estate people that if you buy a rental property in one of the main areas in this country—say Auckland Wellington or maybe Christchurch would also have been at one point. But if you buy in those main areas—in those high-pressure rental areas—then you are not likely to cover your costs—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Not me—not me.MAUREEN PUGH: —oh excuse me—then the landlord is unlikely to cover his costs simply from the rental that he attracts for that property. So there is a real risk in owning rentals. Now we heard through the process that 90 percent of rentals are owned by mum and dad investors and we have also heard from other speakers from the Government benches today about the impact that having more housing stock will have on the market. Well we have been waiting. We were promised last year that there would be 10000 homes a year built to take the pressure off the rental market but actually getting 18 off a developer is not giving any comfort to the sector.Now these mum and dad investors who employ the property managers to let their properties they are the ones who are being spooked by all of the regulation that is coming down the pipeline at them. We've got this ad hoc prohibiting of letting fees—now I'm not sure whether they're simply trying to find work to do on the Government benches or whether they're just simply making ad hoc decisions and wasting this House's time—but we've got a huge review of the Residential Tenancies Act coming down the pipeline the Healthy Homes Guarantee Act which is going to add more pressure to landlords and then there is the risk of having the capital gains tax.I think that this is a very poorly thought through bill. I think the unintended consequences are going to become obvious very quickly and I do not support this bill.