Swarbrick ChlöeCHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green): Tēnā koe. I rise for the Green Party to support this bill. This is a simple bill with a simple goal as has been outlined by members on all sides of this House and I'd just like to foremost echo the sentiments that were expressed by the Green Party member responsible for debating the first reading of this bill Jan Logie. She noted that foremost there were three issues that this bill sought to address and that is why the Green Party stands in support of it.The first is one of geographic equity. I point out to the members of the Opposition who seem to be a little confused about how this bill would work in practice that it currently actually does work with regard to how district councils are operating to provide rates rebates for citizens living in retirement villages. They do so in four different districts: in Auckland in Kāpiti in New Plymouth and in Thames-Coromandel. Those are four different places in New Zealand where this is currently working. The point of complexity which was indeed raised by the report of the Department of Internal Affairs to the Local Government and Environment Committee was predominantly one of calculation. I would hesitate to suggest that whilst the select committee in charge of this bill extended their consideration for a month they had the ability to investigate that complexity—you know albeit the fact that National had been in power for nine years and had the ability to do just that.It's noted by the Opposition that they support the intent but they do not support the bill. So my question to the Opposition is: What would they like to do? What would they like to see?" Beyond stalling beyond asking for more time beyond binding up the resources of this House which they themselves time and time again have lamented the waste of I would like to ask members of the National Party what they would like to see what they would like to do.So the select committee report—there was a majority report and a minority report. The majority report by the members of the National Party on the select committee noted that it was difficult to calculate the rates rebate to apportion rates to a specific unit. This is as was noted in the minority report by Labour Green Party and New Zealand First members a bit of a bizarre incorrect and irrelevant narrative from those National members around that mechanism because it is not all too much of a complex issue given that those with occupation rights agreements in—as I have previously mentioned—Auckland Kāpiti New Plymouth and Thames-Coromandel have received the rebate already.It has also been mentioned with regard to this complexity that they would like to see it referred back to the select committee that they would like to see a more complex mechanism for calculating or figuring out how this rates rebate would in fact work. On that point it seems to be—this is actually why people switch off from politics. This is a request for technocratic bureaucratic delaying tactics. I would suggest that members of the National Party go back and review those 34 submissions by members of the public—all of whom were in favour of this bill. This is the will of the people and if the National Party supports the intent—Andrew Falloon: 34 people.CHLÖE SWARBRICK: No 34 different organisations I will remind the member and the member is more than welcome to go and look at those submissions himself. Should the National Party support the intent of the bill I suggest that they support the bill itself."