Yang JianDr JIAN YANG (National): Thank you Madam Chair a very good choice. The Minister of Justice mentioned my amendment. I think my amendment actually fits perfectly with this particular bill because my amendment is related to clause 172 Interpretation" under "overseas pension". It says an overseas pension currently "is not a Governmental occupational pension" which is of course reasonable. The problem here is sometimes it's very hard to define whether this is a Governmental occupational pension or not. It is very important for us to understand that we have different pension systems in different countries. The Ministry of Social Development (MSD) should take all these different pension systems into consideration which can be similar to but not necessarily clearly defined as Government occupational pensions. This is about basically trying to make sure all those overseas pensions which are similar to Government occupational pensions will also be treated as basically Government occupational pensions. So those that are similar in nature to the Government occupational pensions should be considered as Government occupational pensions instead of overseas pensions.The purpose of this amendment of course is to ensure that MSD takes those other pension systems into consideration whenever it is not clearly identified or clearly defined as a Government occupational pension but is not really an overseas pension so that MSD officials will look into this. This will ensure that MSD understands the nature of certain overseas benefits pensions or periodical allowances and that the affected persons are consulted and not unfairly treated and penalised.Of course some pensions are clear-cut: these are Government occupational pensions—very clear 100 percent. Sometimes they're not so clear-cut: they can be 50 percent occupational pension 50 percent perhaps just State pensions. Sometimes they're even less clear-cut and you can't even tell if it's 50 percent or 30 percent or whatever. So in those situations officials should really take into consideration other factors to make a decision so that if those pensions are in nature Government occupational pensions then we should really treat those as Government occupational pensions instead of overseas pensions.There are many reasons why it's sometimes hard to define whether these are Government occupational pensions or just State pensions. For example sometimes the pension system isn't well established because it is just new and sometimes the pensions are from different systems and they're very hard to understand because of course different countries could have different systems in terms of pension systems social systems and/or social welfare systems. Also sometimes it's hard to get information to understand those pensions because of a lack of transparency a lack of information and also sometimes it can be difficult to communicate and to clarify. That is why I believe it is important to add one particular section there to say that an overseas pension is not a Government occupational pension as defined in Schedule 2 or similar in nature to Government occupational pensions as described in Schedule 2 and as discussed with the person.The reason why I bring up this particular issue is because some years ago—maybe over a decade ago—the pension issue was a major issue in the Chinese community in New Zealand. To the credit of the former Labour Government they settled the issue and they talked to the Chinese community. In the end they came to a conclusion but at that time it was a major concern to many members of—[Time expired]"