Davidson Marama; Rurawhe AdrianMARAMA DAVIDSON (Co-Leader—Green): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. Thank you very much. I'm pleased to take a short call. I absolutely congratulate my colleague Harete Hipango on bringing a members' bill into this House. On one level I can understand the rationale behind wanting to make it easier for volunteer organisations. The rationale put up has been that it is about making it easier removing the heavy—and what my colleague Harete Hipango sees as an overdone—burden of compliance; for volunteer organisations to be exempt from health and safety in work law so that they can retain and recruit more staff volunteers and be able to pay volunteers and still remain as a volunteer organisation for the purposes of that exemption under law.I have some sympathy not so much with the rationale but the intentions behind it because we all in this House understand the importance and the backbone of volunteer work in our community and in our country. And that has always been the case and particularly picking up on the examples that have been used of those types of volunteer organisations that might be a focus of the member's bill thinking of sole-charge schools te kōhanga reo and playcentres. Even in that specific description of the types of organisations I have alarm bells ringing. We will not be supporting a bill that removes that duty of care and that compliance removes the importance for every worker every volunteer to come under health and safety regulations and health and safety standards—and really what my previous colleague Clare Curran indicated which is that culture and urgency of health and safety.I will even concede that the member Harete Hipango does not want to see people unsafe—absolutely understand that. It is simply that this bill is not the way that we will address that perceived compliance. And I absolutely urge us all to take note of the select committee report recommendations which says instead we must provide those volunteer organisations with the training with the knowledge with the support to ensure compliance. What really struck me reading through this very short bill and the report was thinking of those volunteers who might be at risk and vulnerable with such leeway—vulnerable if it is even something as simple as not being able to speak up about some safety measure that they know—or that they might not even know—should be there and that adds a further risk of danger or of being unsafe in the workplace in any way. I'm thinking about those volunteers who—and it may not at all come from bad malice intention from the volunteer organisation but it simply would mean a lesser safety standard. And so I'm thinking of those particular volunteers as well and that we actually don't end up even helping the organisation by removing by lessening and watering down the health and safety standards. I think I wanted to pick up on—I was quite confused actually by the term community purposes" and then it appears that advisers also said that because that is not clearly defined it could create uncertainty in the law. So my understanding is the term "community purposes" has been proposed in the member's bill to be changed under the Health and Safety at Work Act and so immediately I think I want to support the committee's flag of the possible confusion. Now I think it might have been my colleague Jan Tinetti who raised the issue of the submissions and that there were 34 written submissions: eight were in favour four neutral and 22 opposed. I think—correct me if I'm wrong—but I think Jan Tinetti was raising that those submissions that opposed perhaps have been unfairly bagged as larger voluntary organisations who have a head start. But I think my colleague Jan Tinetti went on to highlight that that's not strictly true and wanted to bat that back. So I did pick that up reading through this select committee report that submitters were clear that more targeted training is what needs to happen as opposed to using a legal avenue and removing legal requirements for health and safety.So the Greens are very clear: we want all workers—all workers—to be protected. We want that duty of care to apply for all organisations. The bill doesn't align with the Green Party policy on ensuring that all workers have the right to work in a safe and healthy workplace and that all paid employees should be covered by health and safety legislation because we just start to tip it far too much in the wrong direction. So a short call from me tonight. Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. We will be opposing this bill.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): This is a split call—five minutes. I call the Hon Alfred Ngaro."