Mitchell MarkHon MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney): Thank you Madam Speaker. Firstly can I just put on record that we feel that while we're under Budget urgency in what has been one of the most significant Budgets certainly in recent history for New Zealand—when Kiwis are emerging from a level 4 and level 3 lockdown and trying to actually catch up and understand what has happened to our country in the last eight weeks with a thousand people going on the dole daily—we just do not feel that it's appropriate to bring this sort of legislation in with a truncated process under urgency.I just want to speak a little bit about the history of this. There were Family Court reforms done back in 2014. The intent of repealing this part of that reform was quite simply this: it was to try and keep kids out of the Family Court and it was to give parents the ability to act in the best interests of the children and to go into mediation and not to have to require lawyers and entrenched positions to start to develop. It's a shame that the intent of those law changes weren't actually embraced by the system itself. In some ways it was subverted by the opportunity to put these without notice applications to the judge. Of course the judge still retained the discretion as to whether or not to process those without notice applications. And now we're in a situation where we've got one of the biggest fights in our lives as a nation in terms of our economic recovery and we're trying to do that quickly with as much focus as possible and where it's going to need a large amount of financial commitment from the Government. We've got a bill that's diverting $25 million back into the Family Court system instead of actually just trying to make the system work keep children out of court allow the parents to use that mediation. Instead now we're resetting and going back to where we'll say We need to pump $25 million back into our justice system to allow them to have access to legal aid."I can tell you now: I'm not someone that has always had enormous confidence in our legal aid system because unfortunately when you've got a Government-funded system it is open to abuse; it is open to not being used and applied properly. So when there's a system change like this you would hope that the system would respond to it and try and make it work the best way possible. In this case sadly it doesn't appear to have been the case. I think that there's always opportunities to be able to make tweaks and changes in terms of when any legislation is passed like this but I am disappointed to see that this is basically a full reversal of what was a good policy with good intent and that was fundamentally to keep children out of our court system. I'm not confident that $25 million will even cover this. I think that you're going to see basically that option to mediate almost removed immediately as our legal system moves to respond and re-engage again with the money that's being provided through the legal aid system.So we just wanted to put on record that we don't support this legislation for two reasons. One is that we don't think that it should be used under Budget urgency. This actually should have gone through a full proper process and be looked at and scrutinised properly. And secondly I think there's going to be a perverse outcome where as a country every dollar is going to matter in terms of directed very targeted support around our economic recovery. Instead we're putting money back into a system whereby the only ones that are really going to benefit are the lawyers accessing the legal aid process and we're going to put kids straight back into court again. So unfortunately we can't support this bill. Thank you."