Grigg NicolaNICOLA GRIGG (National—Selwyn): Thank you Mr Speaker. I'm just going to take a short call and join my colleagues to oppose the Therapeutic Products Bill. I think nobody in this House would deny that the intention of the bill is entirely valid and worthy when it seeks to protect promote and improve the health of New Zealanders. I think everybody in here would agree on that but unfortunately this bill that we have in front of us—which is going to pass into law today—is a real failed attempt at that.There's a number of reasons why the National Party has opposed this bill since the second reading and during the select committee process. Primarily to be clear our concerns have been around the overregulation of natural health products the effects of the bill on exports the potential impact that will have on small businesses the effects on cosmetic products and the users of those cosmetic products issues around advertising to consumers the definitions of fit and proper person" and of course the transition period.I haven't obviously sat on the Health Committee but we've remained very close with our members who have sat on it and in the differing view from them in the report back—and indeed in the report back itself—it does speak to an entirely shambolic process and I would suspect that even members on the Government side have felt out of sorts with the way they've actually ultimately been treated by their front-bench members. We know that select committees do put a lot of work into the passage of bills through this Parliament and it's really unfortunate that they have been denied the recommendations that they ultimately have made.The purpose of a select committee as we all know is to scrutinise and approve legislation and to make sure that when it does make its way to the statute book it is as workable and as efficient and effective as possible. That is why the National Party supported this bill at the first reading—because we believe that there were parts of this bill that are valid and worthy. But unfortunately as it has progressed through the House it has become more and more cumbersome less and less workable and less and less useful to members of the New Zealand public. It's particularly concerning when we hear that the committee itself was not willing to wait for information from a further three working groups—and when we see numbers like 16000 submitters opposed to this bill we know that there's a vast majority of New Zealanders who feel disenfranchised and unheard by the members of this Parliament and that is a real shame.But I come back to one of the original concerns that we have around this bill and that is the overregulation of natural health products. Pulling them in to what is effectively a medicines framework is an overreach. I just want to refer to the National Party's minority view where Dr Shane Reti said that the bill has a general ambition to require all medicines and active pharmaceutical ingredients devices and natural health products to undergo market authorisation with a therapeutic products regulator.The National Party believes as I've said that this is an overreach. We have—and this is really important—no compelling evidence and nor has the select committee for substantive and significant or serious harm from natural products. And we're concerned about the cost of compliance on small manufacturers and retailers. And that I think is emblematic of so much of the legislation that comes through this House. It is just not fit for purpose. It is imposing a huge cost of compliance which ultimately trickles down to regular ordinary New Zealanders who will ultimately be the users and purchasers of these products.We also do hold concerns for the impact it's going to have on a burgeoning and potentially growing export market. A number of other speakers have referred to the cost of living crisis that New Zealand finds ourselves in. Look we as legislators I think have a responsibility to promote and invest—and when I say "invest" I don't mean financially—in ways and mechanisms and means that can build our export economy and allow us to get our products offshore. But all this bill does is stifle growth and stimulation and all those important ingredients that are required to get our products overseas and into those huge markets that we look at at the moment with quite some envy.So on that point I complete my submission to the House in opposition to this bill and as other speakers have said we will repeal it when we're in Government."