McAnulty KieranHon KIERAN McANULTY (Labour): Thank you very much Mr Chair. I appreciate the opportunity to make a contribution to this. Before I do I just want to signal that my friend and colleague the MP for Ikaroa-Rāwhiti intends to speak in regards to the Waitangi Tribunal case there which is a point that has yet to be made in relation to the commencement date. But the reason I felt compelled to stand and make a contribution is because on two occasions it has been suggested that the amendment in my name is not as effective a proposal to amend the title as that which is in Tracey McLellan's name but also Grant Robertson's. And I have to concede in regards to the amendment in the Hon Grant Robertson's name I agree. I agree so I encourage the committee not to vote for my amendment and let the record show that when it doesn't pass that's because I've asked it not to! But the amendment that I'm speaking in favour of is the Hon Grant Robertson's proposal that after Products" in clause 1 "(Raising Tax Revenue)" be included.The reason I'm speaking in favour of this as opposed to my proposal is because upon reflection—which if we take a step back and take into account the point of a committee of the whole House stage it is to reflect on proposals made by members and consider the validity of them.Rachel Boyack: What about my one?Hon KIERAN McANULTY: No I didn't like yours. And so the original proposal that I put forward proposing that "Removals of Restrictions" was accurate but after listening to the contribution of the Hon Grant Robertson I actually agree that his is more accurate. Because we have a situation here that the finance Minister herself has conceded that the National Party's support for this—keeping in mind that they did not campaign on this and in fact as a proportion of the current Government the vote share in favour of this is actually quite small but the finance Minister has said herself that the reason they support it is because it will assist her in paying for tax cuts. Now if that is the case it's important that the title reflects the National Party's motivation for supporting this New Zealand First proposal. Now if the Minister disagrees with this amendment she only needs to stand up and speak. I don't believe apart from the opening remarks that she has actually contributed to this debate on title and commencement and it would be useful for the committee if she did because we have had some proposals to change the title such as this one. We've had some proposals to change the commencement date and as I've indicated the MP for Ikaroa-Rāwhiti has a contribution to make in regards to that. All of them valid but how do we know where we stand if the Minister doesn't contribute?So I would implore the committee to consider not my amendment but that in the name of the Hon Grant Robertson to reflect the true nature—Hon Grant Robertson: He's a better man than me.Hon Members: Aw!Hon KIERAN McANULTY: They're so surprised because this is what happens when you actually get on with your mates.Hon Member: Not used to it over there.Hon KIERAN McANULTY: Not used to it over there; bickering yelling arguing carrying on.Hon Member: We're just not used to seeing it over there!Hon KIERAN McANULTY: Oh I see what he did there. He said what I said and threw it at us. I haven't heard that since I was at school when I was six. So thank you for reminding me of back then: "I know you are but what am I?" Just remember that one keep that one up your sleeve.It is true when you consider the make-up of this Government—three parties one of which is considerably larger than the other two and the National Party did not campaign on this; they only support it because New Zealand First want it. New Zealand First as my colleague Rachel Boyack said is "the tail wagging the dog". Let's reflect the actual motivation of the Government as to why they're supporting it and that's why I speak in favour of the Hon Grant Robertson's amendment."