Ross Jami-LeeJAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany): Mr Assistant Speaker thank you very much. I wasn't going to take a call in this debate but I saw the Labour whips flurrying and Mr Faafoi was looking like he was preparing to get up and speak and I wanted to save him the hassle of doing so.This is a National Party bill that was put together and we are going to be supporting it. I have to say though in this brief contribution that I'll make that we are disappointed that the important drug and alcohol management provisions that were in the bill have been gutted from it. I want to say when members like Jamie Strange stand up and say it's his great honour to speak on this bill I want to ask: is it their great honour to strip from this bill important safety measures that will assist in ensuring that there's greater maritime safety in that transport sector because that's effectively what they're doing?It was a National Government bill put together. It's fairly perfunctory and it puts through a range of measures that will be important for the industry. But the key change that they've made—in fact the first maritime transport change that this new Government is putting in place—has been a Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) which has gone through the committee stage that will gut from the bill the important safety measures around drug and alcohol management. So I ask them if they really do care about safety in the maritime transport industry why are they doing that; why did they do it? Why has the committee of the whole House based on their SOP delivered back to the House a bill which we're now debating in the third reading that previously had important safety measures around drug and alcohol management that have now been gutted from the bill.Don't they care about that? Do they not care about the people out there whose lives are involved in the shipping industry? Do they not care about those operators who under the previous bill as it came from select committee would have had the ability to have the people involved in operating those vessels to have random drug and alcohol testing? That no longer will be the case. Safety provisions have been ripped from it.Hon Shane Jones: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Sir I don't want to test your forbearance but can I invite you yet again to look at Speakers' rulings 121/4-6. Now that's not a junior member of the House. He knows as well as I do that those denunciatory remarks ad hominem attacks on this side of the House do not fall within the parameters of what you should expect from a senior member on the other side of the House in relation to the third reading. You are allowed to talk about principles you're allowed to sum up but I think it's a rather dim part in the day's proceedings so I invite you to counsel the man.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): I thank the honourable member for his intervention. I just want to say to both sides of the House that this has been a good debate and whilst there has been a little bit of straying outside of the parameters of the bill both sides have been guilty of that. I call Jami-Lee Ross—and come back to the bill.JAMI-LEE ROSS: I didn't realise Shane Jones was such a delicate petal! We've learnt something new today. He's not talking about A billion trees" any more; there's only "half a billion trees" and they won't be transported on safe maritime vessels because there will be no drug and alcohol management plan through this bill.Mr Assistant Speaker I was talking about the bill that's been delivered back from the committee of the whole House which is perfectly relevant to discuss. Under that bill those members over there have delivered and ripped out of that bill important safety measures and I think this House needs to know that this bill is no longer delivering the safety that the bill otherwise would have as it previously was written. I know that they've made some changes that their union friends wanted and demanded but I have to say they have dampened the safety mechanisms and that's appalling.Bill read a third time."