Tabuteau FletcherFLETCHER TABUTEAU (Deputy Leader—NZ First): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. It's a pleasure to rise on behalf of New Zealand First to continue this contribution in the third reading of this friendly societies legislation. Can I carry on where the previous speaker Michael Wood left off and say what a pleasure it is to be at this stage of the legislation to have arrived here and to be able to as a Parliament come to universal agreement and be able to pass this legislation in the House.What I'd like to do is put that in context because it is worthy of reminding the House and the people of New Zealand just what it is that our friendly societies and the likes of credit unions have been trying to achieve for years and what they've been trying to do under legislation that is—I think it was 1982 that the last piece of legislation was written in this area. So what they have been trying to achieve and what they've been able to deliver is a personalised service—a customised service. For me what struck me in my conversations with the submitters and actually with members out in public engagement was the nature of the engagement—so this is actually members working for and with members. That's quite a significant mentality and it speaks to the nature of the operation of these endeavours.What I'd like to add to that is to reinforce some of the contributions from earlier speakers about the nature of that provision in a kind of geographical sense. So when we talk about the provision of service by members for members what we saw was that personalised service and what we see in New Zealand is credit unions being incredibly successful in the smaller towns and provinces of our country because essentially it is people working for and with people. So that need has very much been a strong need over the decades and continues to be so. I just wanted to take this opportunity in the House to commend those people to commend those friendly societies for the work that they have done and to remind the House and those listening that this affects nearly 200000 direct customers of these credit unions and to essentially celebrate that fact. So as I said it's great to be able to speak in support of this.Now as I said this is 35- or 36-year-old legislation and the businesses have been struggling to operate in what has become antiquated legislation so for quite a while actually the membership—those representing the friendly societies—have tried to engage with politicians on both sides of the House. So in that I think what we saw when it finally made it to select committee—and it's controversial the way it made it there but this is not the time to bring that up. It got there and we're here now and that's worthy of celebration. I think what we saw in select committee in the membership of the Finance and Expenditure Committee—of which I was privileged to be a part in the last term and continue to be so now—was this unanimous drive to see good outcomes for the societies. So we agreed in principle that the evolution of the legislation was necessary and the question was how do we get there.Initially this legislation came before the House or tried to come before the House in an omnibus piece of legislation which was supposed to be non-contentious. Then we found out that some of the membership did have issues with the legislation. So I recollect in my first contribution to the House in the first reading that we made a commitment to those who had dissenting views that the select committee would hear their voices. Indeed the select committee took on board very much and very strongly the words of those submitters who disagreed I have to say in principle with what was being done with the legislation but I think I would have no debate here because clearly we're all in support. We have found a way forward in this legislation and again that is something to be celebrated.What I haven't touched on and would like to point out is that in pushing—well not pushing"; in supporting this legislation through the House we're empowering these credit unions to operate with good modern technology. That was kind of their original drive. They wanted to offer facilities and services that the previous legislation made incredibly difficult. So for New Zealand First in particular in Opposition and now in Government I think that's something to be celebrated where we have New Zealand firms and New Zealand money being empowered to work for New Zealand people. It's good old-fashioned competition in the banking industry and something to be celebrated and I wish them all the best in their endeavours to be good competitors for our banks.As the previous speaker noted they're not trying to be direct competitors and they are constrained in the way that they can lend money but what we do need to acknowledge is that one of those restrictions was that a member of a credit union would go in and talk to the manager there and say "I'd like to borrow some money for my plumbing service. I'd like to buy a new van"—for example—"and I need to take a loan out"—Andrew Bayly: Harley—Harley.FLETCHER TABUTEAU: Stop interrupting my flow Mr Bayly. They want to take out a loan on some capital investment for their small business.Andrew Bayly: Take it over from him Erica.FLETCHER TABUTEAU: Be quiet. What the credit unions were having to do was create workarounds so that they actually—because they couldn't lend to the business entity itself. They had to lend to the individual and it made it very difficult and in fact created kind of obscure tax liabilities as often as not for both the credit union and the business operation.So what we see now is an ability for that direct lending and an ability for the credit unions to loan directly to small businesses and as noted the services are predominantly offered in the smaller communities and in our provinces. So this is a great outcome for these credit unions who want to be able to offer more to their customers.The other thing I wanted to touch on—because as mentioned there were some contentious issues—was the issue of mutuality. It was incredibly important to submitters and in fact what I celebrated in select committee was hearing the submissions—whether I agreed with them or not what I celebrated was the passion behind the submissions. In all cases the people who came to speak to select committee were passionate about what role they had in terms of the business and the way they provided services to their customers.Now what we have done—what the select committee has done and what this House does through this legislation—is make it very clear in the legislation that this continues to be an endeavour under mutuality and will continue to be so and we believe it makes it very clear to those who are passionate about that aspect of their business that they can and must operate in that way going forward.So look those were the big issues. It is a celebration. I'm going to speak longer now—thanks Mr Bayly. It is a celebration. I would like to take this time to celebrate the good work of the select committee. We came in with a positive frame of mind. We came in with a thinking that we needed to help this industry modernise and I genuinely think that we worked together incredibly well on both sides of the committee to work on those solutions.I just wanted to finish by acknowledging the sponsor of the bill Mr Stuart Smith. He worked with—Chris Bishop: He did the whole 10 minutes—very impressive. He did the full 10.FLETCHER TABUTEAU: —an earnest passion to make sure that this—did it feel like 10 minutes?—and I congratulate him on it. Thank you."