O'Connor SimonClauses 1 and 2SIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): Thank you very much Madam Chair. I'm not sure how long I'll take on this particular debate. Clauses 1 and 2 as we also know in this are around title and commencement but I want to break it into two areas. The first really is just some queries around why in Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 24 we've had some date changes.So the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee reported back on clause 2 that they expected that the provisions of the law would come into force on the day after the date on which the Act receives the Royal assent. The Minister of Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Winston Peters for reasons I'm sure are excellent well-thought-out and judged has decided that it should be on 1 February 2019. Now I assume that's for the purposes of trying to get everything in place. I certainly understand that passing legislation doesn't in itself become efficacious and therefore everything it wants just is brought into reality—but some clarity from the Minister as to why we've moved away from the date of Royal assent to 1 February. And the second part of that is why it was 1 February. I assume it's probably post the summer break and so forth but some clarity around that would be most welcome.Madam Chair and the Minister Ron Mark too will also understand of course that we have split the commencement into various parts. So that 1 February is to apply to Part 1 which of course at the moment contains preliminary provisions; Subparts 2 and 3 of Part 2—so again I suppose one of the elements we were getting into in Part 2 was that it was a part with four subparts—and importantly Parts 2 and 3. So that's around the registration of brokers and the permits for brokering. So they are to come into effect from 1 February. A little explanation if possible allowing for time of course would be greatly appreciated to understand exactly what's going on there.We also have then in clause 2(2) that the rest of the Act's going to come into effect from 1 June 2019 according to SOP 24 whereas the select committee have come back suggesting that should be 120 days so some clarity would be welcome there.Look my final thoughts are really just around the title. Sometimes it can always be seen as frivolous but you know words are important. I think by and large we probably have the right idea here. There is a small question of whether or not we could have called this simply the Arms Trade Treaty Enactment Bill" seeing as that's what it's doing. If you wanted to sort of go more generally Minister and sort of make a statement rather than an explanation we could have called this the "Good International Citizenship Bill". If we wanted to get a bit more particular and perhaps to get away from the arguments between dual and single purpose we could have called it the "Transacting of Militarised Equipment Bill".But personally my favourite really is the "Intercessory Military Mercantile Facilitation and Interdiction Matters Bill".Hon Member: That's a good idea.SIMON O'CONNOR: Yeah—the "Intercessory Military Mercantile Facilitation and Interdiction Matters Bill". The reason for that is bibliophiles will love it—bibliophiles will love it. Look I can tell you now Minister bibliophiles will be more excited—more excited—than an esurient thaumaturgist in an apothecary if we go to that. So look "Intercessory Military Mercantile Facilitation and Interdiction Matters Bill"—bibliophiles across the country will be excited. I tell you now. Look at the excitement Minister. It's right here.So look that's really my two points again: some suggested changes in title but I wouldn't mind a little bit of explanation around the date changes. The committee was pretty clear about what it intended to do there. I suspect these are good reasons but it would be good to understand those more."