Swarbrick ChlöeCHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green—Auckland Central): I completely acknowledge the comments of the Minister before around how we're on Part 2 of this legislation and state that we sought to continue the debate of Part 1 but of course members of the Government decided to try and close that part of the debate. I'd also say as the Minister outlined in her response around public submissions—CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Sorry was that a commentary on the Chair?CHLÖE SWARBRICK: No Mr Chair; it was a—CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): I believe it was. The member was quite repetitive in her questioning but carry on and avoid commentary on previous decisions by the Chair please.CHLÖE SWARBRICK: Thank you Mr Chair. So of course as the Minister has outlined we didn't have an opportunity for public submissions because we didn't have a select committee phase of debate and public scrutiny with this legislation. And I guess that's the core point here. Again it needs to be restated time and again because we have less than a few hours to consider and to scrutinise this legislation when in the normal course of events it takes several months of—CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Sorry if the member can hold I'll stop the clock and I'll just allow the Minister—there's a conversation taking place on my right here. Feel free to consult Minister and we'll carry on. I can't do two things at once so I'll just do one. OK Minister? Hon Dr Megan Woods: I've finished.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): OK right. So we'll start the clock.CHLÖE SWARBRICK: Thank you Mr Chair. So the point that I was making is that I completely acknowledge the point from the Minister that what we're referring to here are stakeholders who were proactively solicited and their opinions were solicited and they were consulted with in the process of making the policy decisions and obviously informing the regulatory impact statement. We didn't have the opportunity for a select committee stage. We didn't have the opportunity for those public submissions. So this is the only opportunity that we have in these few hours to discuss and to publicly scrutinise this. And this is the point which I think needs to continually be made. The part that we are debating of course extends the time frame for compliance from 90 days to 100 days. And I would note that again in the regulatory impact statement at paragraph 8—but also listed throughout the regulatory impact statement—we have the point time and again that—and I'll quote here—90 days is very ambitious in the current environment." And I guess I just kind of invite reflections on the fact that the clock didn't start when the pandemic arrived; the clock started as the Minister herself noted at the point that we passed the healthy homes legislation back in 2017. If I remember clearly that was within the first hundred days. The Minister is shaking her head and I believe that she will go on to say that it'll be with the regulations in 2019 which of course this part is also seeking to amend. But the point remains that landlords and Kāinga Ora have had several years to comply. The clock started several years ago and what we are doing now is effectively extending the time frame at the end of the race at the point in time when many should have expected to already be up to date and already had years to get up to scratch prior to the advent of the global pandemic."