Young JonathanJONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. Yes I stand to take this split call. You know it's not that this Opposition is opposed to this legislation it's that the officials in their position are opposed to the mechanisms of this legislation as much as they can be in being impartial servants of this Parliament. [Interruption] Not your Government sorry Madam Assistant Speaker—that member's Government.If we look at the comments by the officials it needs to be read out and reiterated again. As Mr Hudson said As outlined in our initial briefing to the Committee the Department of Internal Affairs … considers that the Bill as introduced would not achieve its stated purpose. Additional and complex amendments would be required". But what I want to go to is their conclusion because their conclusion says this "However even if future work were limited to the eligibility of retirement village residents for a rebate a thorough consultation process with stakeholders prior to commencing law drafting would be desirable to achieve a good outcome for all parties."What they are saying is that there was not a thorough consultation process. In this House we want to make good law not just more law. We want to have quality regulations not just more regulations. Seriously I have sat on the member's Ruth Dyson committee in the last Parliament and I have to say she was a competent chair and this bill does not reflect the competence that is needed in order to do good for the people that are designed to receive the benefit of the intent of this bill. I'm saying to the Government on the other side especially the new members: instead of being tribal be intelligent. Instead of just opposing us because we are your Opposition why don't you listen to what the officials have said—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Order! Order!JONATHAN YOUNG: Thank you. I know what you're going to say Madam Assistant Speaker. Why don't members opposite support the quality legislation? Why don't they try to earn a reputation of presenting quality legislation to the House in order to truly benefit the people that they intend to be benefiting? What we see in this piece of legislation—it is so complex. It is complex because there are people in retirement villages right now today in New Zealand—Hon Tracey Martin: They have to meet the criteria. JONATHAN YOUNG: —who pay less than what they could possibly pay if this piece of legislation goes through. Well that's a very good point that the member across there raises. If there are four retirement villages in this country that can do this then this legislation's not necessary—it's not necessary because they have found a way. So here we go wasting the time of this Parliament wasting taxpayers' money to put this piece of legislation through and it's all because there is legislation here that is not up to scratch.Seriously I do put it to members of the Government: why don't you really consider because you do talk about being fair being kind being a Government that considers people who have some need—Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Look we can't go on having you being brought into the debate. Now I don't want to be too pedantic about this but you might have to think about a yellow card and then a red card.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Thank you. I thank the member. [Interruption] Thank you. I thank you for your intervention. Thank you.Rt Hon David Carter: Speaking to the point of order the member will be aware that of course Speaker's rulings were changed in 2011 at the behest of the Standing Orders Committee. It's OK for the Speaker to remonstrate with a member who continues to bring the Speaker into the debate but it's not OK for any other member to interrupt the debate and to do so. The member should know that.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Thank you. I appreciate the intervention.JONATHAN YOUNG: Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. Thank you to the member opposite. In my closing remarks may I say that National have supported the intent of the bill but did not agree that the bill was the best way to achieve it. Nor did the Department of Internal Affairs; they said a more comprehensive review of the rebate Act was needed. Nor did the Parliamentary Counsel Office support it as well. So there you go—that's the quality legislation that this Government are putting forward for this country."