van Velden BrookeBROOKE VAN VELDEN (Deputy Leader—ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of the ACT Party in opposition to the motion to set up a special select committee to hear from submitters on this Pae Ora (Healthy Futures) Bill. I've got a few reasons to do so but the first reason is just the Health Committee is established in order to actually discuss health-related issues. I have to also acknowledge the speech that's just come before us from Elizabeth Kerekere acknowledging that a lot of the members of our committee do very very diligent work. A number of them have a background in healthcare and another number have a background as the health spokesperson of different parties. So I want to acknowledge the hard work that all of these members of the committees do.But if I look at the specific numbers of the committee that the Government wishes to establish they want to set up this new committee with 11 members—six from Labour two from National one from ACT one from the Greens and one from the Māori Party. Currently you know that doesn't actually look too different. Under the current Health Committee—SPEAKER: Order! Order! I'm just going to remind Mr Bridges that he's meant to be wearing a mask.BROOKE VAN VELDEN: Whoopsie. Currently the Health Committee has 12 members. You know that's not that different; that's one member off. But our membership of the Health Committee is one ACT member one Greens member one Māori member three National and six Labour. So really the difference here is that we've gone from a committee that could in fact be 50-50 Labour and Opposition if you take the Greens to be part of the Opposition outside of the membership to a committee that can for all intents and purposes pass through the select committee with no Opposition voice whatsoever because the majority of the committee will be Labour members.I think that is rather disappointing because if you look at what the select committees are actually supposed to be established to do they are there to hear from submitters and to make changes to legislation where they see fit so that the health departments and any other departments that need to be brought in to the debate can have their voices heard and have the debate that's fulsome.I think what is happening here is that this Government is just acknowledging by establishing only 11 members that they don't actually want to hear any differing opinion in the select committee. They don't actually want to hear from GPs who might have a different view. They don't want to hear from the DHBs who might be disestablished. They might not actually want to make any changes to the legislation whatsoever. And in doing so by putting a majority of Labour members in place the Government Minister of Health Andrew Little will be able to pass through no changes whatsoever even if they did need to be made based on the genuine concerns that come from submissions. I don't think that is a good precedent to be setting in any case.But the second point that I'd like to make is—and if you'd let me I'll read from the Standing Orders: Standing Order 187 and it's about non-voting members. It says that The Business Committee may appoint a member to serve on a select committee but without the right to vote on any question put to the committee or participate in any decision taken by leave of the committee. Such membership may be permanent for a limited time or for consideration of a particular matter. The Business Committee may end such an appointment."So I'd like the point to be made that it is quite possible that if the Government truly wishes there to be a different form of representation than proportional representation which is supposed to be done under select committees—you know we're supposed to put in place select committee membership that the people voted for representative of the people's views; a diversity of viewpoint. If the Government would in fact wish to put in place a different proportionality of representation based on race then why was this not brought to the Business Committee? I mean if you look at that the Business Committee may have actually said "Well it's possible that we could appoint a number of members for a short time to look specifically at Pae Ora (Healthy Futures) and that it could be disestablished at the end of such appointment."I also note that the Standing Orders was changed recently to say that any person who's a member of Parliament can actually just go on to a select committee and ask questions if they want to; you know you don't actually need to be a permanent member of the committee to do that. You can turn up and ask questions and I'm sure Dr Liz Craig would be very willing to allow more scrutiny of any type of health bill under that particular manner.I just reiterate that point that there are other avenues that we could have gone down to make sure that a health bill is recognised as a health bill that proportional representation isn't done away with and that if other members want to join the Health Committee they have a right and an obligation to do so if they truly believe they should be there. But the membership of this committee—being 11 members with a Government majority that is different to the Health Committee—is put in place specifically so that the Minister of Health does not need to feel challenged on any aspect of the health reform by any members of his own party. I believe that this is a divisive change. It sets a negative precedent. Thank you Mr Speaker."