Ball DarrochDARROCH BALL (NZ First): I'm not too sure why Mr King isn't taking this piece of legislation very seriously because it is very serious for all of those business owners that it affects and not only that but all of those victims of the cowboy vigilante clampers that are out there. Not only that but what he has just told them—I hope they're watching—is that he didn't care very much about their submissions when they came forward. They not only came forward and gave oral submissions but there were a number of written submissions describing what they went through the intimidation that they went through the tactics that they went through and the issues that they went through from these cowboy clampers. So you know New Zealand First is taking this very seriously. I want to thank the Transport and Infrastructure Committee and especially all the advisers to the committee too because even though on the face of it it should have been quite a simple bill and piece of legislation to go through we actually found—as the committee should do—some issues through it and some unforeseen issues that were opened up through the attempt to curb the cowboy clampers through this piece of legislation. I'd just like to mention something that Brett Hudson said actually which was that the committee was forced to do something. I certainly as the chair was not forced to do anything and I know that all of the other members of the committee on this side of the House didn't feel forced to do it. It was part of the select committee process called democracy Mr Hudson. Not only that but the only entity that was forced to do anything was the Government on this side having to be forced to address the issue of cowboy clampers because that party over there when they were in Government did zero—did nothing. So Mr Hudson might want to stand up and accuse the Government of forcing the committee to do something but in reality the Government has stood up within the first couple of years of being in Government and done something for the victims of these cowboy clampers. The other thing that I failed to find was any minority view from the National Party. So Mr Hudson stood up and he was leading the charge from the National Party and he said that they had a number of changes or dislikes in the bill and didn't agree with a lot that was going on in the changes. Mr King also said that he disagreed with the $100 cap. But there was no minority view. In fact all of the other members of the committee from this side of the House with me actually can back me up—I hope—and we failed to find any argument that they actually came up with during the select committee stage at all. So I'm quite surprised by the two speeches that I've heard so far and I hope that notes weren't passed around to repeat them because they're just simply not true. This like I said is a very important bill. I'd just like to acknowledge the fact that we heard from a wide variety of submitters from the consumers themselves to the people who were victims of the cowboy clampers. We heard from the retail outlets as well and the concerns that they had and also from the clamping organisations themselves. One of the struggles that I had through the select committee stage was that actually each one of them had quite compelling arguments from different perspectives and different points of view. It was a challenge for the committee to come up with the piece of legislation that we have but I think that we've come up with a very good and balanced and focused piece of legislation. I think it's important for members of this House and the public to understand that all of the people who were the consumers and the organisations like Consumer New Zealand and the Automobile Association who were representing those who were affected by the wheel clampers had a common theme—for example with the cap they said that it was too high. All of the organisations and individuals and companies whether they were the wheel clampers or the retailers were all consistent in saying that the cap was too low. So there was no real ready and perfect answer for this. We asked for an extension to it as well because we wanted all of the information and the knowledge and the advice from the advisers—Hon Member: We looked at overseas jurisdictions as well. DARROCH BALL: —and we were quite thorough about that. I've just heard—which is quite true—that we actually sought overseas jurisdictions' information on how they applied their different regulations and legislation and what worked over there and what lessons were learnt. We came up with a very thorough focused and balanced piece of legislation and the committee and the advisers should be quite proud of that. I think it's also important to note that no matter what part of that continuum they are on whether they be the retailers the companies or the consumers the vast majority if not everybody understood the intent of the legislation and the fact that there needed to be some changes. As has been mentioned on this side of the House and by the National Party as well there were up until this point some very serious issues and unacceptable circumstances that some people found themselves in and still find themselves in where they are away from their vehicle for 30 seconds if that and come back to find their wheel clamped and have to pay upwards of $500 $600 $700 or $800 and that's obviously totally unacceptable. So the Government's decided to do something about that. We took the legislation through to select committee we've gone through that and we've made it a very balanced and focused piece of legislation. New Zealand First supports it. Thank you Madam Speaker.