Faafoi KrisParts 1 to 28 schedules 1 and 2 and clauses 1 and 2KRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana): I have been waiting for some time to speak at the Committee stage of the Statutes Amendment Bill. In my first contribution I want to draw on two Supplementary Order Papers on this bill that are on the Table: one under my name Supplementary Order Paper 191 and Supplementary Order Paper 207 in the name of the ACT leader David Seymour. In essence those two Supplementary Order Papers (SOPs) are offering the ability for the Government to have a get out of jail free" card because my SOP looks to insert something in the bill that I think is non-controversial and something that most parties would agree to. It is not a massive departure from policy or a large policy issue that would require the debate in a separate piece of legislation. Unfortunately for this Committee the contents of my Supplementary Order Paper are contained in another piece of legislation a member's bill in the name of Nuk Korako a National list MP. It essentially looks to amend the Airport Authorities Act 1966 to allow airport authorities or airports to advertise in mediums other than the newspaper when they want to sell luggage that has been lost or left at airports. Just to clarify the law does need to be changed because at the moment the Act as it stands allows airports to advertise the sale of lost luggage that they are now taking responsibility for only by way of a newspaper advertisement. This change contained in Mr Korako's bill and also within SOP 191 would not change the world entirely—I know you should not say that when it is your own SOP—but it would save this House this Parliament and the taxpayer a significant amount of money. When Mr Korako had his bill pulled from the ballot he said at the time that it was an issue that had been raised with him as someone who was a member of Parliament in and around his daily work engaging with the industry. At that time I think I had been the spokesperson on tourism for the Opposition for around about 4 or 5 months and I think I took a pretty aggressive approach to making sure that I was engaging with stakeholders including Christchurch Airport the local airport of Mr Korako. But not once was the issue of advertising sales of lost luggage raised with me—not by Christchurch Airport; not by Queenstown Airport; not by Wellington Airport my local airport; not during the extensive visit to Auckland Airport both domestic and international which I had the pleasure of visiting; and not by Air New Zealand which I spent a complete day with getting to know the operation. So I think Mr Korako's assertion that this is a major issue for the likes of airports or airlines is slightly—and I am been slightly diplomatic—wide of the mark. So in an effort to try to save some time of this Committee I think this is a perfect opportunity—through the Statutes Amendment Bill—to address the issue this great gap in our tourism sector that Mr Korako thinks is so important that he thinks it is worthy of a member's bill in the ballot. My SOP SOP 191 would essentially do everything that Mr Korako's bill which is before the House as a member's bill after being pulled from the ballot would do. So if an airport found itself overwhelmed with a quantity of luggage that it thought it needed to offload my SOP would allow Christchurch Airport—to give an example from Mr Korako's own patch—to advertise in other than the Christchurch Press that it was going to have a sale of lost luggage. It would also allow Christchurch Airport to advertise online and in other modes of communication. I guess that would also open up the option of radio advertising. I am not sure whether Mr Korako has thought about that. It may be that that is something he could raise at the select committee if my SOP does not get through. I am being a little bit tongue-in-cheek here but a Statutes Amendment Bill is a great way—it is a way that we are currently using—to tidy up legislation and to make sure that things that are not controversial do not take up the time of this House. I think the fact that this SOP had to be brought to this Committee—there is another SOP in the name of David Seymour and I am sure he will be down at some stage to talk to it—means the issue should have been included in a Statutes Amendment Bill which speaks to the point that I believe that the member's bill ballot process in Parliament is being abused by the Government.Hon Ruth Dyson: Yep.KRIS FAAFOI: It is. For people at home who do not know how the member's bill ballot operates it is a little bit like Lotto. Members of this House who are not members of the executive I understand get to put a piece of legislation that they feel very passionate about—it could be a local issue—into the ballot. Every so often we have a draw and if your bill is drawn from the ballot then it possibly may get debated in this House. I think that process should be used for bills that are worthy of the time of this House. Quite bluntly advertising lost luggage by any means other than the newspaper should not take up a first reading should not take up a select committee process should not take up a second reading should not take up a Committee stage and should not take up third reading time in this House. Mr Korako's bill will cost taxpayers thousands of dollars if not tens of thousands of dollars potentially creeping up to $100000. We have at the moment a situation where services in our country are struggling for funding yet this Government and that particular member think that this issue is such a big issue it should be debated and go through the complete legislative process in the House. I also think the Government knows it has got it wrong because Gerry Brownlee at one stage tried to have it pass through all stages in an attempt to save face.Hon Ruth Dyson: It didn't work.KRIS FAAFOI: It did not work. I am not sure that this is going to work because I believe also that any member of this House—and maybe I should not tell New Zealand First this—can object to my SOP and then it is off the Table and it will not happen. But I think we should try to save those tens of thousands of dollars and the time of this House respect the process of a members' ballot and not have ballots for that sort of legislation anymore. So we could do away with that in Mr Korako's case. We can also do away with it in the case of Mr Seymour's SOP which I believe will streamline the process for a bill under the name of Matthew Doocey. So I guess the ball is now in the Government's court and also in New Zealand First's court if they actually want to save the taxpayer some money. There are two SOPs—two of the three that are now on the Table—that will potentially save a couple of hundred thousand dollars and a lot of time in terms of the processes of select committees where issues that New Zealanders really care about could be discussed and debated and we could progress through this Parliament inquiries or legislation that will make a difference to the people of New Zealand. Advertising the sale of lost luggage is not on anyone else's radar other than Nuk Korako's. I want to know from Mr Korako where this issue came from because I think there would possibly be one or two people—Mr Korako's executive assistants who have probably had to wade through quite a bit of research because of this—who are actually concerned about this issue."