Cosgrove ClaytonHon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour): I just want to revisit some of the questions I asked the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs because with respect they were not answered. Fundamentally what Labour members and other colleagues who have taken calls want to know—because we could not get it out of officials—is whether this bill will work given the reversal of the primary Government proposition. For instance if we look at page 2 of the commentary it talks about given the reversal the Lack of benefits either to businesses or to patent attorney firms making applications on their behalf:". It talks about "Increased administrative costs to New Zealand businesses:". It talks about on the following bullet point "Significant costs". Then we go to consultation and quantifications of cost. "We consider that there was a lack of"—this was the Commerce Committee's report Minister—"consultation with patent attorneys and the rest of the industry before the development and proposal of these enabling provisions. Moreover we consider that quantification of likely costs—that is the costs of developing and implementing these processes and the compliance costs to the industry and patent applicants—was inadequate." My simple question is as we posed in the Labour minority view given that there was no cost-benefit analysis done or demonstrated unless one accepts that the notion of "back of envelope" and "best guess"—I am trying to think of the figure that was given to us but forgive me I cannot remember—is appropriate cost-benefit analysis and I am just going to take a short call is can the Minister give the industry and by that I mean the innovators not the patent attorneys the innovators; not those who charge fees but the innovators who need intellectual property protection an assurance that this reversal will work to their benefit? If the answer to that question is yes could he demonstrate that by quantifying a cost-benefit analysis which I assume his officials will now have done now it is some weeks that it has been from the select committee process? Could he quantify that and could he tell us what the benefit of this reversal will be? Because as other colleagues have said we are supporting it. We supported the original proposition it was reversed and we are supporting this proposition because we want to see this legislation work for the benefit of the innovators. But we remain—and we have made this clear in our minority view—none the wiser with respect and it is a rather unusual legislative position to be in where legislators will go through a process support legislation but still have a major question mark as to whether the rationale that they were presented with was so flimsy such that it was that it will actually give effect to the intent of the legislation. So we simply seek assurances around its effectiveness. And if the answer is yes it will be effective for that innovative industry those entrepreneurs then can that be demonstrated? Can some evidence be provided in respect of quantification of costs and benefits? I think that is a reasonable non-political request to make and I am sure all the constituencies in the sector will be grateful for those assurances by the Minister."