Andersen Ginny; Leary Ingrid; Watts Simon; Pugh MaureenHon GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour): Thank you very much Madam Chair. My question is also in relation to table 1 which is on page 20 of the bill in question. I would like to know how the range of dollar and pay threshold and rates relate to the new tax thresholds and rates that are stipulated in that table at the top of page 20.So what I think I heard and if he can confirm is that if this table is in fact about fringe benefit tax rates—which is not that apparent from reading the bill to be honest. Could you clarify that? Specifically it would be good to know how the range of dollar and pay thresholds and rates relate to the new thresholds and rates that have been proposed through the changes. Thank you.INGRID LEARY (Labour—Taieri): I note that—picking up from where my colleagues have left off—looking at the ESCT which is the employer superannuation contribution tax a lot of people may not have heard of that but that is very similar to a fringe benefit tax except that it applies to superannuation contributions.We've heard a lot of discussion about what the change to thresholds are attempting to do but I'm really interested to know—given my capacity as Opposition seniors spokesperson and the information that I've had and the calls that I've taken over the last few months about the impact of superannuation and the superannuation gap for women—what advice or consultation there was for the superannuation contributions in these tables around these thresholds? Was there a gender lens put on it at all? Because this would have seemed a really good opportunity in my view given that there is a big disparity about the superannuation that many women are left with because of the stalling in their careers—often they go off have children whatever and they don't get to contribute. Now under the previous Government we had committed to having a superannuation scheme that meant that those women who took time out from their careers would still be able to benefit and to close that gap. I see it a lot in my electorate with homelessness. It's called the invisible group" a lot of women who don't have that money are often left couch surfing and so on.So it would have seemed like an ideal opportunity here when shifting these groups and looking at superannuation specifically—which is what this table does—to consider a gender approach and see whether there would be any kind of policy intervention policy tool that could have been used cleanly in this legislation to try to leverage off that; to close that gap. Given the speed at which we're doing this in and given the fact we don't have a select committee process I can harbour a guess and I would say in all likelihood that the Minister probably didn't even remotely consider it because I don't think it's reflected in any of the policies that we've seen.But I would like it on the record if that's the case because we don't have a select committee process. Women are concerned; aged care groups are concerned about the gender gap. This would have been an opportunity maybe not to fix it but to at least get advice on that. I'd like to know if the Minister sought advice or if the officials provided any advice or if he even turned his mind to what the implications of this would be for the superannuation gap for women.Hon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue): Thank you very much Madam Chair. The member raises a fair point and the reality is that if we go broader the disparity for women in particular at retirement is a gap against men and that is a well-known factor. The reality of what we're discussing here though within this bill is the consequential impacts of changes in personal income tax rates. What the member is referring to is a broader conversation in terms of superannuation from a policy point of view which is not reflected in this part of the bill.CHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh): Members the time has come for us to break for the lunch break. We will suspend until 2 p.m. Thank you.Sitting suspended from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m."