Wood MichaelMICHAEL WOOD (Labour—Mt Roskill): Can I say at the outset of my comments that this is a proud day for the parliamentary under-secretaries of this House. Team PUS" has a bill in the ballot that I believe has a good chance of success with this KiwiFund Bill. So congratulations to my colleague Fletcher Tabuteau. I also while I'm in a generous mood want to congratulate the previous speaker Andrew Bayly for genuinely giving an excellent speech on the New Zealand Superannuation Fund. And what I admire most about a person is their ability to reflect on past wrongs and to come to the light. Because of course what we know about the National Party is that they opposed the implementation of the New Zealand Superannuation Fund at every single stage. They voted against it here in Parliament and I've got absolutely no doubt that if we go back into Hansard and review the remarks of National Party members at that time in 2002—and the Hon Ruth Dyson might remember some of those—we'll hear that it was socialism that it was communism by stealth that it was a terrible thing.But we've just had an excellent address from Andrew Bayly about the importance of that fund in building up our national savings rate. And of course the previous National Government didn't contribute one dime to it in its nine years in Government—something that's been rectified with a billion-dollar investment under this Government this year. What I am proud to do is to stand here on behalf of a party and a Government that is a party and a Government of savings. We are a Government that is absolutely committed to New Zealanders having the savings to build our national wealth to develop our economy and to ensure that every Kiwi family is able to live in dignity and with some stability in their later years. And the outstanding success of KiwiSaver—another measure that was opposed by National when they were in Opposition last time with every bone in their body. It has been an outstanding success—moving from only 16 percent of New Zealanders having superannuation savings to 2.7 million New Zealanders or 75 percent of Kiwis now having savings through KiwiSaver. So I say thank you to that previous Government and thank you to Dr Michael Cullen for having the vision and the foresight to ensure that we had a proper savings scheme for all Kiwis.And what is this bill about? This bill is about saying "Well that's great but there are always things that we can do to improve our framework." And in this case it's about recognising that while many Kiwis have taken advantage of KiwiSaver and that's giving them greater security in life that there is without any doubt whatsoever an issue when it comes to fees—that there are questions that need to be looked into in this area. We know for example that 60 percent of KiwiSaver funds are held by the major Australian trading banks. We know for example that the fees are relatively high and I refer to a report here from the Financial Markets Authority which reviews the KiwiSaver schemes on an annual basis. It tells us that investment management fees rose by $46.8 million from $219 million in 2016 to $266 million in 2017. So we have over a quarter of a billion dollars every year that is being pumped out of those savings and into the pockets of fund managers by way of fees. Administration fees rose $4.6 million dollars or 5.9 percent in that year from $77 million to $82 million. Per member the average administration fee paid increased from $29 to $30 that year. So it is something that is very much worth looking into. And some of the advice you get from smart people in the sector for people who are looking to invest in KiwiSaver is "Look at the fees and base your investment on that." Another paper that I read by Brent Sheather who is an authorised financial adviser and a commentator noted that the average fee of growth-oriented KiwiSaver funds at around 2 percent a year including transaction costs is more than 20 times the average fee paid by institutional investors like the New Zealand Superannuation Fund and more than four times the average fee prevailing in more competitive savings markets like the 401(k) scheme in the United States. Why wouldn't we look into that to make sure that Kiwi savers are getting the best possible savings scheme possible? Why would we not do that? Mr Tabuteau's bill is quite refined. It's quite modest. It says "Let's set up a working group with smart people from the sector who know their stuff to look into these matters review them get the evidence and produce a report that will then go to the Minister. It will then come back to this House where it can be looked at where we can consider the recommendations and look at whether we can make that great KiwiSaver scheme even better than it is." This is a bill that I commend to the House. I'd urge other members to consider it. And can I just acknowledge the contribution of Fletcher Tabuteau and the New Zealand First Party for bringing this issue to the table. I think it's a good bill and I'm very happy to see it proceed to the next stage. Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker."