O'Connor Greg; Boyack Rachel; Doocey MattClause 5 Section 329 amended (Regulations relating to levies) CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Members we come now to clause 5. This is the debate on the amendments to section 329—regulations relating to levies. The question is that clause 5 stand part.RACHEL BOYACK (Labour—Nelson): Thank you Mr Chair. I've got a lot of questions around clause 5 because actually in my view this is the most detailed and substantive part of the bill. So the main question I think that we just want to get some really strong answers around is why the Minister has chosen to exercise regulations instead of putting the interest payments plan into the primary legislation. I think it'd be fair to say that there are always concerns when secondary legislation is used in this manner. That what the Minister is looking to do and just reading through the regulatory impact statement here is to make changes in the Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation (Interest Rate for Late Payment of Levies) Regulations 2002 as a transitional arrangement. So making a direct change to the regulations to have a sunset clause to then go through that fee-setting process and then include the levies—what they are—as part of the standard consultation due in 2024. So obviously there's a process that's going to go through here. I guess the concern I just wish to put on record is because we're not going through that select committee process usually a select committee would receive a report from the Regulations Review Committee on any secondary legislation that's introduced. I just can see Mr Penk there—very fond of the Regulations Review Committee—and Mr Meager; Mr Eager Meager" is also quite—Ha ha! Is also—[Interruption]CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): It's a tribute to the food at Copperfield's that there's this much energy still going at this time of night. Carry on Rachel Boyack.RACHEL BOYACK: I come back to the role of the Regulations Review Committee and just note that I guess this would be where we would put some concern on record that we are going to be moving to a long-term provision of what is essentially a permanent interest payment that can be added to a levy through regulation. And given the sensitivity around this and the opportunity for the House to actually set these levies whether the Minister actually took some advice around putting the payments into the primary legislation. I think it's an important question that we get an answer to.The other matter—and look I do note that our colleague from the Green Party raised this under clause 4 but it actually does come under clause 5 where we amend section 329—the regulations relating to levies. In amended subsection (2A) "The Minister may not recommend the making of regulations under subsection (1)(hb)(i) unless the Minister has first received and considered a recommendation from the Corporation made in accordance with section 234(1B)." My question to the Minister on this is: in what form will that recommendation take? What will the process be for him to both receive and consider that recommendation? Because again when we are setting payments that New Zealanders are making if they are undertaking an instalment plan there is I think a fair understanding particularly when we're talking about often small businesses who do come under cash-flow pressures—I think it's fair for them to have an understanding of why we're using regulation to set these payment terms. And then also what will the process be for the Minister to receive those recommendations? Because I think people need to have that trust and confidence in the system.Just lastly before I finish my contribution and I'll probably come back to make a further one shortly with some more questions I do just want to acknowledge the Amendment Paper that has been tabled by my colleague Ingrid Leary and I'm sure she will be seeking a call on that very shortly to add a new clause 5A. There's been quite a conversation tonight about the provision of instalment payments which I think the House for the most part is in support of. And I think Ingrid Leary has made a very sensible suggestion here around making sure that ACC must provide instalment plans and actually it's probably a fair thing to include in the Act. So I know that my colleague will be seeking a call shortly on that particular matter.Hon MATT DOOCEY (Minister for ACC): Thank you Rachel Boyack for those questions. The question around why regulations: because they provide flexibility and are in line with the Legislation Design and Advisory Committee guidelines. Of course she highlighted a very important area around the pressures on business and cash flow. I suppose that is why the regulations will provide those instalment opportunities."