Penk Chris; Faafoi KrisCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Thank you Madam Chair. Just a couple more small points from me. I don't suppose I'll need too much time to make these additional points in relation to Part 1 but really again just for the sake of the record as much as anything. Remaining on clause 7 amending section 7 of the legislation in relation to the appointment of a child I see that's to be someone who is by reason of various different factors suitably qualified to represent the child. And it seems to be just reading that on the face of it that it's intended that it will be a person who is appropriate to represent the child in a very broad sense qualified I suppose we could consider to have a particular meaning about legal qualification coming as it does in the context of training experience but my expectation and hope is that that's a very broad kind of understanding of appropriateness so I'll just sort of flag that small point on the way through.The second is actually not dissimilar but it's in clause 8 of the legislation so that would insert a new section 7AA and this is headed: Lawyer appointed to represent child must explain proceedings to child". There it's talking about the age and maturity of the child and the context is that an explanation is to be given in a way that the child is most likely to understand. I think that the word "maturity" really would sort of cover both aspects because the maturity could go to not only their actual age but their ability to comprehend maybe taking into account any sort of learning difficulties or developments that the child might have. So if there's any further comment the Minister can make on that fine; if not then happy to sort of let the words take what I would consider their ordinary natural meaning and therefore sort of pass into the record on that basis. My third and final point—and I did say that these were relatively small but potentially important none the less—relates to clause 9 and this is the duties of lawyer when giving advice. If the Chair will indulge me I'll just read these words because I think they're important: "(2) Before commencing a proceeding under this Act a lawyer must take any steps that in the opinion of the lawyer assist in enabling the issues in dispute to be resolved as safely fairly inexpensively simply and speedily as is consistent with justice." The reason I highlight those is that it seems to me these are absolutely consistent with existing legal ethical obligations. I would like to think moral obligations as well would come into the reckoning of any person who calls themselves a lawyer for a child but certainly as a matter of professional standards these are the kinds of considerations that a lawyer should take into account anyway. So I'm not sure that that adds terribly much by spelling it out but I also don't think it does any particular harm. But if there's anything obvious that I've missed in that regard then I'd invite the Minister to add to that.Of course all of this is in the context of that bigger picture question of the lawyer's role as distinct from the role of others and the centrality of that in the legal process so that's a bigger picture question which will only be resolved in time I suspect. I hope for the sake of all those who are caught up in the Family Court situation including and especially children that it does certainly improve from the situation currently and indeed the situation that was faced in 2014 with delays being obviously quite damaging to many family situations in the development of the poor small persons caught up in the process. So any comments on those specific points we would welcome otherwise that's probably about as much as I would seek to contribute under the heading of Part 1.Hon KRIS FAAFOI (Minister of Justice): Well I thank Mr Penk for his contributions to Part 1. Quite simply there's nothing like a bit of reinforcement in terms of trying to ensure that we do make the system as efficient and effective as possible. I'm not suggesting that the duties of lawyers are the overriding reason as to why there are delays in the court process. Obviously we want to introduce care of children lawyers at the beginning of the process to be able to navigate those early stages quicker because as I mentioned earlier mediation at the beginning can make about 250 days difference in the resolution. I think there's also a wider issue of the management of cases within the court system that will need addressing at some stage and a coming together of these issues I think will get us to a point where we have a system that is on behalf of New Zealanders the most efficient system that takes the best interests of all parties involved and does the least harm. And that's what clause 9—I think it was that the member was alluding to—goes in some way to reinforcing.I think there is some general concern in some of these processes whether by tactics or by direction hearings can be delayed or put off in the court process. And again the duty on the lawyer to ensure that that doesn't happen I think will ensure that especially children in the middle of these processes can have a resolution to a very difficult period in their lives."