Xu-Nan Lawrence; Doocey MattDr LAWRENCE XU-NAN (Green): Thank you Mr Chair. So when we're looking at clause 5 I have a question around inserted subsection 329(2A) The Minister may not recommend the making of regulations"—I will touch on some of those regulations in clause 6. Now one of the things in terms of the context that we've been discussing between clause 4 and clause 5 is that clause 4 is coming from the perspective of the corporations but as opposed to the regulations clause 5 is coming from the perspective of the Minister for ACC. I think that distinction is really important. If the Minister could answer my previous question around the use of the word "may" in clause 4 inserting subsections 234(1A) and 234(1B) into the principal legislation. The question I have and the clarification that I would like from the Minister is around the use of the word "may" in subsection 329(2A) inserted by clause 5(2) and particularly the term "may not".Now I'm not an expert when it comes to the drafting of legislation and the use of the positive and the use of the negative in terms of the grammatical form. But in clause 4 inserting subsection 234(1A)—where we are looking at "may" instead of "must"—we are offering flexibility to the corporation that if they don't want to they don't need to charge the levy on the interest payment. But what I want to know—and the clarification and the guarantee that I need from the Minister—is that for inserted subsection 234(2A) the "may" will not be interpreted in the same way where the Minister then may make regulations without the consultation process of the corporation or without factoring in the consultation of ACC.Now this is really crucial. The Minister mentioned before that the duration—when I was asking the question of subsection 234(1B) the Minister has answered that there is a four-week consultation period that we're looking at when they are consulting levy payers on the proposed rate. So we are looking at people businesses who are going to be consulted and who will be going out of their way to respond to the consultation of the corporation. Then the corporation package it up deliver it to the Minister but it says in subsection 329(2A) inserted by clause 5 that "The Minister may not recommend the making of regulations". Again I would like to note that the negation negates the fact that before making changes to subsection 329(1)(hb)(i) the Minister still has to take into the consideration the recommendation made by the corporation.So that guarantee—from the Minister—that the Minister will seriously consider and take on board the recommendation of the corporation is absolutely vital to the entirety of this clause. So if the Minister wouldn't mind shedding light or providing some sort of confidence or some sort of reassurance that there is going to be no point at which he will make alternative recommendations or alternative decisions against the consulted recommendations of the corporation—after all of the things that they are doing with the levy payers and all of that—that that's not going to happen. So if the Minister could answer that question on the words "may" and "may not" and whether negation plays a part in this I would be really really grateful.Hon MATT DOOCEY (Minister for ACC): Thank you very much Mr Chair and I thank the member Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan for his contribution. Just to assure him that the word "may" is drafting consistency throughout the Act."