Bayly AndrewANDREW BAYLY (National—Port Waikato): Thank you Madam Speaker. A pleasure to be speaking on the Financial Professional Services Trading Advice Transparency Bill first reading. And my congratulations to my good colleague Barbara Kuriger for doing a good job and thinking about the hard-working business owners mums and dads who own our 580000 small businesses particularly in New Zealand.Hey I loved that last line from that last speaker Shanan Halbert about doing just a little bit more work". Well I just wish the Labour members actually just did "a little bit more work" and actually thought about this bill rather than read from their notes.So I thought it'd be useful just to give a little bit of context. Unfortunately I only have five minutes. But this is really pertinent because since the start of this year we are fast approaching 100 building and construction companies that have gone into receivership or liquidation since the start of this year—100 construction companies. And actually over 200 if you go back 12 months. We have a huge crisis in the building construction industry. It is happening. Liquidations and receiverships are the end results of poor markets and interfering Governments who don't actually set about trying to help them. So if anyone doesn't think this an important issue it is vitally important.Now I think it's useful just to elaborate on what we are talking about here. So a liquidation—and I know Mr Greg O'Connor may have got to the bottom of this but I didn't hear it in his contribution. A liquidator is appointed by the company's shareholders therefore if they do it it's a voluntary thing; or by unsecured creditors; or of course the court. That is what liquidation proceedings are. A receiver is appointed by a bank and that is often where there's a huge conflict between the shareholders and the banks.It was interesting I just thought I would talk to a retired practitioner—and someone said practitioner. I'm just going to quote—just indulge me—what he wrote: "I think this is a good bill. When banks send in an investigating accountant that is the prelude to whether in fact they might put a company into receivership. To advise on the viability of the business the first thing the accountant does is work out how they can get more work. One of those ways is to recommend receivership. The current Act currently provides that they are not conflicted"—and this is a thing I never heard from any of the members on the other side—"from doing this."Now the other interesting thing is that there is an established practice in Australia where liquidators and receivers who've been banned actually go and do this pre-investigation work and then recommend their mates to try and do it. Now I'm not suggesting that happens in New Zealand. But it is a common practice overseas. This bill is about conflicts. It's not about the Financial Services Legislation Amendment Act 2019 which did make significant and considerable changes to liquidation and receivership position. And we welcome that. But this is a further nuance about dealing with the issue of conflict. It's interesting that the drawing of Barbara Kuriger's bill coincided with changes to the New Zealand insolvency engagement standard. Again that standard includes the new requirement to consider whether there are any reasons for not accepting a role such as insolvency appointment. But practitioners do not appear to include a principle about not accepting appointments to execute actions when they themselves have recommended it—i.e. the standard does not adequately deal with the issue of conflict. That is the purpose of this bill. And that is why the Labour members on the other side should have actually done some more work. So they stood up and spoke about something that they talked and thought about for a few minutes of reading a few notes that someone in one of the offices prepared. This is a good bill it should be supported. And shame on you."