Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I would just like to make some short initial remarks with regard to two amendments in the name of Sue Moroney: Supplementary Order Papers 348 and 349. These two amendments are positively Venezuelan in that they name a particular company and target it as though the purpose of the House is not to make laws that apply equally to all New Zealanders and all who operate in the Realm of New Zealand but that we are actually legislating in the House naming individuals or naming corporations and bullying them through legislation. That is the sort of approach that we find in Venezuela where Sue Moroney's fellow travellers have destroyed the country—Iain Lees-Galloway: How much is this contribution worth?DAVID SEYMOUR: —and as F A Hayek predicted have taken that country down the road to serfdom where it now finds itself having collapsed inevitably from central planning to out and out dictator—Iain Lees-Galloway: Is the cheque in the mail yet David? DAVID SEYMOUR: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Iain Lees-Galloway has asked whether I am receiving a cheque for speaking in the House. As you know under Standing Order 120 that is unparliamentary and not the kind of behaviour we would expect from a King's College old boy.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Well I can understand the sensitivities. However he said: Is the cheque in the mail?" and he could have been talking about anything. He did not actually refer to whom the cheque could be from or speculate. I take the point you are making in respect of the context though and I would suggest to Mr Lees-Galloway that he refrain from making such glib comments.DAVID SEYMOUR: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. This is a fresh point of order. Prior to that he asked: "How much is this speech costing?". If you are seriously denying that he is in contravention of Standing Order 120 then I think you have misread what he was saying.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): I ask Iain Lees-Galloway whether he confirms that that is what he said.Iain Lees-Galloway: Yeah he is close enough.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Well I suggest you withdraw and apologise.Iain Lees-Galloway: I withdraw and apologise.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Actually I was not suggesting that; I was instructing it.DAVID SEYMOUR: Thank you Mr Chair—Michael Wood: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Mr Seymour's point of order interrupted one that I was about to take myself which is that the prior comment that had set off that exchange was comparing a Labour Party member to a regime that is murdering its own citizens on the streets. I think we take offence at that and would ask that that is withdrawn.Sue Moroney: I have taken offence.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Unfortunately the member should have objected at the time. But let us just see whether we can deal with this in a relatively respectful way bearing in mind the latitudes of the House.DAVID SEYMOUR: Thank you Mr Chair. However I have to say that comparing one's policies is quite different from comparing one's motives and it is a fact that throughout history wherever these types of policies—socialism and central planning—have been adopted they have inevitably led us down the road to serfdom and have inevitably concentrated power in the thugs and bullies and led to great violence.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Let us get back to the bill.DAVID SEYMOUR: If Michael Wood is offended by that I am very sorry but those are the facts. To have a member of the Labour Party in 2017 putting an amendment before this House that targets a particular corporation—Sue Moroney: And ask them to pay their taxes.DAVID SEYMOUR: —names it and attempts to shame it is a disgrace. And there is Sue Moroney saying: "Oh well we're only asking them to pay their tax." Well the fact of the matter is that the assumption in a civilised society in a democracy in 2017 is that all corporations are observing the rule of law and only Sue Moroney could possibly misunderstand that and put forward such ridiculous amendments to this bill. So I hope that these amendments will be voted down I hope that they will not stand and in fact Mr Chair I hope that you will rule them out of order because I felt it necessary—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Order! I can put the member's mind at rest. I gave an indication to the Committee earlier that the Supplementary Order Papers in respect of the company are out of order because they relate to an indeterminate date. However debate around the company is within the scope of the bill.DAVID SEYMOUR: Thank you Mr Chair. Nevertheless I think it is important to put it on record that for this House to make legislation targeting specific individuals and targeting specific companies is positively Venezuelan and the Labour Party should be ashamed for putting such amendments before this Committee. Thank you."