Martin Tracey: Telecommunications (Development Levy) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMartin Tracey: Telecommunications (Development Levy) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 21 May 2015. Volume:705;Page:3747. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TRACEY MARTIN (Deputy Leader—NZ First): I am ecstatic to rise to speak on clause 2 particularly the part of clause 2 that my learned colleague Chris Hipkins from the Labour Party has started us down. I think he has raised a very very good point about the fact that nobody can assume that any legislation will be passed. Obviously one of the reasons for the beginning date of this legislation is that one of the things the Governmentwants to do I am sure and one of the things that parties supporting this bill want to do is make sure that those telecommunications companies have the widest possible opportunity to amend their budgets to make sure that the levy that is in place—the levy they know has been in place since 2011—is going to continue until 2020. We want to give them a strong lead-in on that because nobody wants to actually negatively affect those telecommunications companies in the way they do their business.Also the Minister made the point that as soon as we know where the money is going to come from there are other conversations that can take place around the provision and who is going to do this that and the other. But actually I want to go back to the point that Mr Hipkins raised and that is around Royal assent. I think it is a very very valid point. For me personally it is one of the reasons why New Zealand should never become a republic. I think it is one of the strongest reasons why New Zealand should never become a republic.Let us imagine that this piece of legislation with the start date that is required is not in the best interests of the country. Let us just imagine that for a moment. With a start date such as this where it requires Royal assent to begin then the Governor-General can actually refuse to sign it. Until the Governor-General signs it on behalf of Queen Elizabeth—a very fine woman whom I personally admire—it does not become the law of the land. Therefore if this was not a billthat was in the best interests of the country—and New Zealand First is obviously supporting it; we believe it is—that one little clause around the start date around Royal assent would actually save the country. It is the last backstop to bad decisions by this House. I am not sure that that is where Mr Hipkins wanted to go with his contribution but from a New Zealand First perspective or from my perspective specifically this particular clause is incredibly important. That piece around Royal assent keeps us safe.One of the things we must never get rid of with regard to start dates and pieces of legislation is the Royal assent. That is our last protection for bad legislation. The Governor-General can decide to sign any legislation. People might decide to do away with the Governor-General but until he signs a bill it cannot be put in place. I agree with Mr Hipkins that that is a very very important clause. More members of the Government should stand and take calls on that particular clause because I believe that they obviously would support it. They would support the start date being on Monday possibly or Tuesday if the Governor-General has appointments.Kris Faafoi: We could still be sitting on Monday.TRACEY MARTIN: Oh well there you go. You see it may not get out of the House by then. But the moment it gets to the Governor-General he will make a decision as to whether it is in the best interests of this country. We all know what a fine man the Governor-General is. All of us trust the Governor-General and his judgment. Therefore that clause again is a very very important clause inside this piece of legislation. Kia ora.