SpeechHARETE HIPANGO (National): Thank you Mr Chair. The last speaker asked a question of the Minister: what is being done in the regions to promote Matariki and particularly those of us with tribal areas who have a regional variation and difference in terms of the dates and the timings of Matariki? In Whanganui it's Puanga. So I'm waiting to hear a response from the Minister to that question.Whilst we're waiting for that response I add another question to the mix. Well in fact it's a statement Minister. Earlier you said in this Chamber that there weren't any submissions put to the Māori Affairs Committee from the business sector and from the business community. I correct the Minister in relation to that because it was reported at page 3—I beg your pardon page 12—of the Māori Affairs Committee report back to the House discussing that Some submitters expressed concern about the costs an additional public holiday might present to businesses that are already facing an increased minimum wage additional sick leave and ongoing effects of COVID-19." So I think it's important that there is accurate factual information that the public are predisposed to rather than a certain view that comes from the Government in maintaining and supporting this as a public holiday which the National Party does not oppose the principle of but we do query and question the implications in the imposition on our business communities.I addressed this matter in the House when I spoke to the bill either last night or the night before or the day before and a statement again that a Labour member of the Māori Affairs Committee made was that it's a Pākehā perspective to say that the fiscal implications only comes from that whakaaro that line of thinking. That's not the case. As a former Māori business owner and knowing current Māori business owners the implications on our SMEs our small and medium enterprises our business operations—they are the ones who carry the cost and the burden. So if the Government is so insistent that this bill is going through I invite the Government to consider some form of subsidy—and whether that's out of scope of this bill in the way was deemed that substitution of another holiday—some form of subsidy might be imposed that comes from the Government coffers as opposed to the taxpayer coffers. So again the reason why I raise these issues is that these are the practical implications and impositions on a sector of our community—of course many of whom will support the principle behind Matariki but let's get real. Cost of living is huge. For our members—Hon Member: Wrong bill.HARETE HIPANGO: It's not the wrong bill because this is about the kai of a nation. So I'm speaking to the bill and I'm addressing the Minister's answer which stands to be corrected in terms of a misinterpretation of what the Māori Affairs Committee had reported back. There are fiscal implications so to dismiss and dispense with that is not correct.I also in speaking directly to the bill—I'm trying to find a copy of it. Regrettably I wasn't sitting on the Māori Affairs Committee at the time of these matters because I had other duties calling me to important issues which is about the wellbeing of our children. But coming to Part 2 a clarification please because the wording of this is not clear. Clause 6 "Regulations": "(1) The Governor-General may by Order in Council made on the recommendation of the Minister make regulations adding to Schedule 1" and Schedule 1 details the dates for the next 30 years that Matariki as a holiday will fall. So "make regulations adding to Schedule 1 a date in a year on which the public holiday will be observed to acknowledge Matariki in that year."—could we please have some clarification as to what that actually means?"