Goldsmith PaulHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): Thank you. Thank you for that non-answer Mr Chair Mr Speaker—whatever he is; he's Minister" I think. I suppose the final and broader point—and I don't know I sense a slight determination on the part of the Minister to get on with it and just ram all this stuff through one week before an election and we worry about that. But the broader point I want to make is around the impact that it has on this being an example of a Government that has had a tendency to add regulatory costs particularly to small businesses but all businesses very freely and with surprisingly little thought given to the impact that it has on consumers.Because ultimately all the cost of this filters through the system and ends up adding to the cost of beer and wine or whatever in this case. But there are many other—countless—examples. If you think in the area of housing for example if you pass all the regulations around expectations around XYZ there's no magic. It doesn't come out of the air. Somebody has to pay for it. And then ultimately in the case of housing it ends up with the renters having to pay for it.So in this area what we've got in total is we've got flinging open the doors wide when it comes to any objectors from anywhere. Not just sort of saying it should be individuals who object but it can be organisations the temperance union or whatever from anywhere can come and object to anything. And then it lists all the sorts of things that have to happen in terms of translation being offered. It should allow for an unspecified set of tikanga that could be incorporated. So a whole lot of extra ability for these things to go longer and in a more convoluted fashion. The one countervailing thing that the bill does offer is the fact that you can't ask any questions of the people who make objections and so you've just got to sit there and listen to it and then ultimately pay for it.I suppose the thing that worries me is the kind of assumption that the small-business operations which are by far and away the largest number of licence holders—small operations little mum and dad operations—can just soak up all this and if it takes a few days to grind your way through this process so be it. And if it costs you $2000 well so be it and that will magically sort of just appear from somewhere and it won't have any impact on the costs.Then secondly whether it will have impact on—so I mean what we're trying to achieve is to reduce the harm of excessive liquor consumption in our communities. But we're also trying to balance the fact that we also want a vibrant hospitality sector. And I've heard the Minister in the chair wax lyrical on many occasions particularly in the context of the Rugby World Cup and FIFA and all that about how wonderful this is for the hospitality sector and how important the hospitality sector is. Yet at the same time they're passing legislation which may have an enormously profound effect on participants in that sector if they fall foul of the views of somebody from anywhere and the local alcohol plans if they are unduly restrictive.So the two sort of comments that I'd like to hear from the Minister is: how is he so confident that this process won't lead ultimately to higher costs to consumers and is he confident that the hospitality sector in general is supportive of this legislation and that they're calling out for it and that they think that they would be treated reasonably under it?"