SpeechHon TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): I thank the Minister for Social Development for that answer. I think actually she skirted around the central point that I was asking and the members of the public can form their own conclusions about that. There was no question that I'm sure every member of this House—and probably just about every member of the public—would agree with the observation that she made about people in the workforce who have lost their jobs as a result of COVID. Of course that is the whole reason for this measure. And as the MP for Hamilton West throughout the lockdown I spent a lot of my time assisting constituents who were small-business owners to access the wage subsidy. I'm very grateful that it was there. They were absolutely grateful that it was there. So there's no argument about that. The question is all about the two-tier system. And with respect the Minister has skirted around that.But let me go to another one because I think it's sort of flipping the issue on its head and I haven't heard her give us an answer to this particular issue yet. What we are looking at of course as a result of COVID is a huge extra burden on the taxpayer through assistance through benefits and all the rest of it and we're talking about a payment here—I'm not quite sure what body language you're giving me Madam Chair—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): To stick to Part 1. Keep going.Hon TIM MACINDOE: My question is for the Minister: instead of approaching the measure as she has why hasn't the Government put far more of a focus into supporting businesses—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): That's outside Part 1Hon TIM MACINDOE: OK. Well then I'll come back to it because it is a very important question. I'll make a note of it for later because we absolutely have to have an answer to it. I would ask her—Hon Poto Williams: It's irrelevant. That's why.Hon TIM MACINDOE: I beg your pardon?Hon Poto Williams: It's not relevant to the bill. That's why you haven't had an answer to it. It's not relevant.Hon TIM MACINDOE: Well that's an extraordinary comment from the Hon Poto Williams and I'm pleased that she's put that into the Hansard because that's deeply offensive to everybody who's in this position in our community.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): No. In fairness we are debating the bill that is before the committee and the question you are raising is something that is beyond what is in front of us. It is a far broader question and the committee stage's focus is on Part 1.Hon TIM MACINDOE: Yes well the Hon Louise Upston raised some issues specific examples of unfairness and I presumed from the fact that she was allowed to ask those that they are—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): Because they have to do with the programme—the income relief payment programme.Hon TIM MACINDOE: Well I do think that the public want to hear a very clear and fair answer from the Minister as to how it is fair to say to people in the tourism industry who lost their jobs in February as a result of the border closure from China—Hon Poto Williams: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. Thank you Madam Chair. Thank you for your generosity with which this committee stage is being conducted and I understand the need for scrutiny considering that this piece of legislation is not going to wider public consultation. However I am concerned that having sat in the Chamber for 40 minutes now the questions that are being asked and re-asked of the Minister are being answered again and again. And I would suggest that a better use of the committee's time would be to ask other questions that are more relevant to the scope of the bill.Hon TIM MACINDOE: Speaking to the point of order—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): Look I don't need it because actually there isn't a point of order. I am managing the process and the Minister is being very generous. The question of timing is relevant to the programme and I have allowed that. And it's up to the Minister to decide if she wants to continue answering those questions. But there is really no point of order.Hon TIM MACINDOE: Thank you Madam Chair. I just want to gather my thoughts for a moment because I certainly don't want to comment either on the ruling or the point of order that has just been raised but just to refocus on where I was going.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): So that's a comment without commenting is it? Sorry to interrupt.Hon TIM MACINDOE: I'm trying to ensure that I remain within the scope that you have outlined.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): Good. We're on Part 1.Hon TIM MACINDOE: Yes we are on Part 1 and for all of the fact that it's now been distracted I think the question has not been answered as to how it is fair to people in an industry who lost their jobs for reasons that were clearly COVID related—we started to see the impact of COVID well before we went into the lockdown—but those people who lost their jobs as a consequence of COVID fallout affecting their industry are not covered by the income relief payment that this bill is making available despite the fact that they lost their livelihoods because of that reason. I'm asking the Minister to explain why that is so and in particular to justify to those who are in that position and who feel aggrieved and are telling us they feel aggrieved why she's made that decision. And I don't believe she has answered that yet.