Woods MeganHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram): Thank you Mr Chair. It is a pleasure to take another call on this bill. There's still an outstanding question. I thank the Minister in the chair Nicola Willis for answering some questions and giving some clarity. But one of the things that I still am not clear on from the answers that the Minister has given—and I'd welcome her given that we're not having a select committee process for this bill to provide this committee of the whole House with some clarity on the need to have changed reporting requirements on the Act.Part 1 of the bill is narrowing it down to that single purpose so what advice did she receive around how it is that we need to change the reporting requirements to ensure that we're not having adverse outcomes on employment given that the dual mandate is being received? I welcome the Minister informing the committee of what advice she received and if she's not going to support that amendment then what provisions and mechanisms is she going to put in place to ensure that we do have active monitoring? It's not enough to say that the principal Act has a review requirement and leave it at that because the Minister is changing the Act. So what is she going to do to change the reporting requirements and what are we going to see there?The other thing that I'd just like to ask the Minister some questions around is my further amendment the amendment to clause 10 which my colleague the Hon Grant Robertson just spoke about after section 123(2)(b) to insert new paragraph (c) providing for an additional economic objective. The Hon Grant Robertson highlighted that actually in making these changes to the legislation we might be doing something quite serious in terms of reducing the scope of the banks down to such a narrow purpose—so what do we do in those exceptional circumstances? I think previous colleagues have talked about the foot and mouth provisions—what mechanisms do we have where there are extraordinary circumstances where the scope and mandate of the bank needs to be changed within the legislation? I'm anticipating that the Minister may say that she'll put it in the remit but what about the legislation? What are the legislative provisions in this Act that could be put in place to ensure that we do have those protections and that we do have that other word the Minister likes—that sufficient flexibility—to ensure that we do have those provisions there?Given that we're not going through a select committee process and we don't get to hear from officials what is the advice that she received on this? What are the options that were put forward? I'd like to understand some of her reasoning for what options she either accepted or discounted and what the pros and cons of those various options were. When we're putting a bill through this mechanism under urgency it is the role of the House to understand the reasoning behind a Minister's decision-making and to have some transparency about some of the options and advice that were offered to that Minister and if the committee can go through and debate it.So I would very much like to know whether or not she will support my amendments to add that amendment to clause 10 to add an additional economic objective; if not why not and what is the advice that sits behind her decision and the options that sit behind her decisions?