Bayly AndrewANDREW BAYLY (National—Hunua): Thank you Madam Chair. I'm very happy to let the other speaker take a chance if she wants but anyway thank you to the Minister for Economic Development for providing a bit of a background on the Regulatory Systems (Housing) Amendment Bill (No 2). I think as we've seen with the previous two bills that have been progressing over the last half an hour to an hour or so these are about tidying up certain aspects. This one obviously has aspects related to housing but maybe less than what people might otherwise construe.The first thing is I think it's worthwhile just having a look at what it's actually about. Amended section 172 set out in clause 4 is an issue about dealing with the level of disclosure about what is required from retirement homes and I see here that the specific clause states that it does not require the authority to include on the register information about a person whose membership on a provider's governing body ended before the provider became a registered community housing provider but the authority has discretion to include that information." So there's a little bit of a nuance around the nature of some of the information that's required.The second aspect relates to the issue of misleading advertising and the Minister certainly covered that. So I think it's worthwhile just to recap that. At the moment there are certain fines if retirement villages "inadvertently"—and I say that in quoted marks—are sometimes misleading or deceptive in the way that they advertise. What this seeks to do is tighten up those provisions to make sure that people are not subject to deceptive or misleading advertising.Of course we have a very large and growing retiree population in New Zealand. It's vital that we support them and make sure that if they are moving into a retirement home in fact they do get what they pay for—and nothing more but certainly nothing less. So what this does is it deals with this by saying that there'll be a fine for a person of not exceeding $15000 or $50000 for a body corporate or in fact $5000 or $10000 for a body corporate depending on the discretion or misdemeanour or the level of misleading or deceptive advertising. This is all covered in section 79 of the Act.What the Social Services and Community Committee recommended was amending clause 7 of the bill to remove the reference to section 26 in section 79(3) of the Act. This would mean that the higher maximum fines would apply where an operator or promoter did not take all practical steps to ensure an advertisement was not misleading or deceptive. Now I don't think anyone in this House is going to debate that that's not a good thing. We all believe it is.The other thing I just note is the Minister's Supplementary Order Paper 395 has a slight change in the title: "replace 'Housing Restructuring and Tenancy Matters Act 1992' "—Alastair Scott: Well spotted.ANDREW BAYLY: Thank you Mr Scott. It's amended to use the title of "Public and Community Housing Management Act 1992".So I think this is a good amendment—not terribly significant in terms of legislative drafting but it is significant in terms of making sure that our older people in our communities are well protected and looked after and on that basis I think that it's inevitable that we're all going to commend it to the committee."