Menéndez March RicardoRICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green): Look this bill tends to be relatively uncontroversial and we haven't identified anything that we have issues with. I guess it is worth noting the political tensions raised by the Minister around this belief that sensible regulation can be really good for the wellbeing of the country while at the same time there is a political drive to slash regulations that actually often protect for example the safety of workers in the workplace or allow them to stay well.So I think it's just interesting that in the context of a non-controversial bill there are still political statements that I think are at odds with what has been said—between what has been said in the first speech and then what the Government is actually doing. But look this bill does make amendments to a series of Acts and apologies because I mean I want to make sure that I get them right. But you know they make amendments to things like the Electricity Act 1992 to the Employment Relations Act 2000 the Gas Act 1992 Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 the Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007 as well as the Mines Rescue Act 2013 and the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Act 1987.I wanted to pick up particularly on the changes to the Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007 in just around the clarifications around immigration applications being put forward on behalf of an applicant unless the agents are licensed immigration advisors and clarify personal criteria for cancelling suspending an immigration license. I think to me that's an important conversation we need to have in select committee as well around how that will impact people's lives on a more substantive level. As an immigration spokesperson having worked with people who have been failed by immigration advisers I think it's important that we have robust systems in place to make sure that that workforce that does really important work in supporting our migrant workers actually has clear guidelines around for example what how and when their license will be struck or suspended if they don't act accordingly. And also when we've worked with so many people who have had other people from the community put forward their immigration applications it is really important that we do have robustness in place to ensure that those immigration applications actually are—if somebody's going to support the applicant that it is somebody who has received the adequate training. Because we're talking about people's lives being on the balance quite often when those immigration applications are made.But I think more than anything the key message for us is that it's going to be really important that people and the public actually makes submissions on this. Because I mean we're all in agreement that these changes do feel politically non-controversial but we need the public backing to ensure that any nuance that we may have missed actually gets identified.So far the Greens feel comfortable with what's been presented here and we do look forward to a constructive conversation about getting regulations right. I think when it comes to the nature of this bill I hope that's translated as well and more broadly. And a political agreement that actually regulations are particularly a good thing when the market in and of itself won't regulate itself or when there are for example professional areas that have not been shown to adequately support members of the communities. So the Green Party commends this bill to the House.