O'Connor SimonSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): Thank you very much Madam Speaker. It's interesting that the previous speaker said this has landed in a fair space and that's probably the element I'd quibble with. I don't think it is fair I think this is a bill which its exact intention is to tip the balance in a very particular direction. We've heard obviously the elements particularly from the Minister about how the law now will sit—basically to give the submitters a lot of influence around how things are set up and in effect whether or not they are happy or not with the physical set up the translations and everything else in order to present. We've heard that cross-examination of one side of submitters is basically going to end. We're hearing as well that an appeal process is effectively tossed out the window. Now you can argue as I'm sure the Government will do that those are good things but I would not say that they are fair.But to back up the horse and cart somewhat let's be absolutely clear that New Zealand has a major problem with alcohol. That's an absolute given. That said I am not convinced that this bill is going to fix that. One I think the problems—well let's not get into it tonight but why and what drives New Zealander's drinking behaviours is one thing. But the second is that actually a lot of the providers those who sell alcohol—and I'm thinking of the liquor stores in my electorate. I've visited—and don't take this the wrong way. I visited them all the way that I visit all the businesses in the Tāmaki electorate but they are good hard-working people running small little businesses to support their families. I don't believe that those that I've met in my electorate are the problem and unfortunately this particular amendment bill is targeting them. At the very least it's creating an enormous uncertainty which anyone who's been in business knows is one of the worst things you can have. Why is this bill going to create uncertainty? As some submitters—and it was interesting the Government hasn't chosen to speak to those submitters here in the House today—said that they could have run their businesses their little liquor stores for five 10 30 years and all of a sudden a change of the local alcohol laws will mean that they have to shut down and there's no real appeal rights.Yes you can do a judicial review. But boy that is a massive overreaction if you will or rather it is causing a business owner to go down a very expensive troublesome route which may or may not be successful. But the removal of what has been a good process to date to appeal doesn't make sense to us. Paul Goldsmith touched on it—councils don't make the right decisions. God I mean we know it ourselves that this House doesn't always make the right decisions. So the idea that again the appeal rights go doesn't make any sense whatsoever. The last point for me—I mean it hasn't been touched on so far—is we are talking here about local alcohol policies and yet this bill allows anyone or any organisation from anywhere within the realm to submit. So some of my local Tāmaki liquor stores could have people from Invercargill—no offence to people from Invercargill; they're fantastic. But why would a group or a person from Invercargill have any right to opine on what's happening in the electorate of Tāmaki is beyond me and so it just doesn't make sense. I do understand though—and I want to finish on this—the intention. I do understand why the Government is looking to do this. It comes back to that fundamental point I think we all or most of us agree on that there are alcohol problems—but this is not the way to address it. Fundamentally I think it's not going to solve the alcohol problems in New Zealand. All it's going to do is cause a lot more harm to our business owners and so I cannot support this bill.