Boyack Rachel; Penk ChrisRACHEL BOYACK (Labour—Nelson): Thank you to the member Chris Penk for that useful response—I think that's very helpful. One of the other—I guess what we would call crudely—unintended consequences potentially from this bill which the member alluded to in his response was about the potential for those who may take an approach like this to be able to seek access for example to estates when birth parents pass away. This is a challenging issue I think for people who have been separated through a process from their birth parents and then have been reconciled and been able to form a relationship later in their lives. But this is a matter that did come to the Governance and Administration Committee's attention and could potentially open up opportunities for people to be able to seek access to the estate. So I'm just interested in I guess two questions for the member. One is around the appropriateness of that and whether it's something that needs to be considered on a case by case basis and any particular protections that have been put into the bill to protect from that situation occurring.CHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Thank you. Again I thank the member Rachel Boyack for her thoughtful analysis and the question that followed that. I think we've been engaged in a bit of a balancing act here. We have sort of wanted to open the floodgates only enough to prompt a response that is more general that would be able to help others in another way but not in a way that would result in potentially thousands of such applications to local MPs or other MPs in areas throughout the country. So the wisdom of encouraging—as my colleague and friend David Bennett said—even a dozen or so cases I think would be a great burden. And I don't mean that unkindly but it would be a lot for the relevant Government agency the Department of Internal Affairs to contend with to advise as many as 12 times if we're saying a dozen just for the sake of argument. And of course for the House's time to be engaged in a private bill on multiple occasions simply wouldn't be practical. So I don't encourage that. In fact I officially discourage it.But having said that I don't think that Annie would want me to give any suggestion that she is minded only to have this situation ameliorate her own situation. Indeed she's been an advocate and members of this House have made it clear that they are advocates for improvements in the way that other situations might be handled. Perhaps it could be in the future—and I speak not as a matter of party policy but just thinking aloud so to speak. It might be a matter of a law being amended to allow such applications so that those who wish to make such applications can do so. Those who are perfectly happy not to revisit the past in that way you know would have the choice not to do so as well.I do note for the sake of the record—not only as it pertains to this bill but also as a relevant consideration at least in my mind as to the circumstances of this matter—that Ms Oxborough's adoptive parents are no longer with us so we haven't had to be concerned that the effect of this bill would be disrespectful or might appear disrespectful in a way that would be inappropriate to those persons themselves who as I say we mean no disrespect to and likewise for others in such situations.