Goldsmith PaulHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): Thank you Madam Chair. And yes we do come to the crunchy part of the bill in relation to introducing collective bargaining to the screen workers industry areas which hasn't been the case in the past.People might be surprised to learn that films have been made in the past in the absence of this collective bargaining and people haven't been driven to the edge of extinction. Actually it's been a highly successful and prosperous business that has created many opportunities and jobs and livelihoods for many New Zealanders and great films have been made and that's something that we're all very proud of. My favourite well in recent times is probably Boy actually—we sat down with the family over the weekend and watched it. What a gripping film very great film. I'm not sure of the union arrangement in that film but nevertheless it was made and it was good.The point is that the industry is in good heart. It continues to have many opportunities for these things to happen. So the Minister is out here driven we believe primarily by ideology around this and is imposing on this sector significant changes.Some of the languages that we're getting from people in the industry firstly are concerned about the adversarial sort of tinge that is coming back into the sector—memorable from the bad days of the initial incidents that led to the initial legislation—regarding painting the sector as the wild west and some of the sort of language that was bandied about. The us-and-them kind of attitude that sometimes goes with these sorts of situations is of concern to some in the sector when the area is struggling. Post-virus nobody's had a chance to stop and take their breath; they're stressed; they're coming from a difficult sort of period and now having to face what could be very long intensive negotiations. I suppose a starting point is that the legislation at the start says that an incorporated society has to be formed for both the worker and engager organisation. The engagers are the ones who are you know producers who are putting together these films. So they have to sort of form these societies—Screen Production and Development Association might be one of them; I don't know—who would engage in the negotiations.There's a very sort of obvious question that needs to be asked: well who pays for all this? Because this could go on for months. It's complicated; a very complicated sort of process that could drag on. And the organisations don't have the people who—well nobody's really done this sort of stuff in that industry. So you're going to have to hire a whole bunch of new people with new skills engage in long-winded processes. Who's going to pay for it all? How is that going to work? I'd be interested if the Minister had given much thought to that.The second thing is that there's been a very significant sort of shift and I'd like the Minister to just set out if he could the differences between what the working group came up with—again not particularly operating in the voluntary sort of circumstances as an industry where Government funding is very significant; Government wants something and is determined to have it. The industry doesn't you know and they have to you know kind of do what they have to do. They have no choice. They recommended a few things in the space. But the bill and the Supplementary Order Paper have moved a long way from there in terms of detail—a long way towards the fair pay language of legislation that's been developed as well. There seems a lot of some similarities between those two pieces of legislation.So I'd like the Minister just to if he could outline the differences between the original recommendations—arguably made under a bit of pressure—to where we are today.