Muller Todd: Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMuller Todd: Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 17 September 2015. Volume:708;Page:6832. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty): I rise to take a short call on the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Amendment Bill now that it has been reported back from the Local Government and Environment Committee. I think my colleague and chairman Mr Simpson summarised our process in the select committee very well. It was collegial which is becoming almost a habit in the Local Government and Environment Committee—Grant Robertson: Oh we’ll sort that out.TODD MULLER: Yes I am sure you will Mr Robertson but it was a very good process. Obviously this particular bill came from the history of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services (Financial Assistance Package) Amendment Act 2011 which was a very good law that we had put in place and it was immediately taken up by a number of people. But as they went through the process a couple of little anomalies were identified. It is appropriate to make sure we do this once and right and properly. If it becomes clear that some people could potentially fall out of eligibility through no fault of their own it is absolutely appropriate that we go through this process and get those issues tidied up.So as we have heard there are three main provisions in this bill: the definition of the built date the legislative location of eligibility criteria and finally the expiry of the Financial Assistance Package. Obviously the issues around the built date and the definitional issues around that became very stark as an issue post the Osborne v Auckland Council decision in June 2014 when the definition moved from the final point of council inspection to the point where the code compliance certificate was issued.This potentially opened up the eligibility for a slightly smaller—but obviously very critical if you are one of these people—pool of people who could potentially be eligible for the Financial Assistance Package. So obviously this bill will enable that to occur.There were some technical changes with respect to essentially bringing the contribution criteria together and moving them into the Act to reinforce their validity. Finally the third—the key—component is the expiry date of the Financial Assistance Package. It is due to expire on 23 July. All claimants will need to have been issued a notice to proceed but we wanted to ensure there was a mechanism that enabled people who could demonstrate they were close to that notice to proceed to still be part of that cohort if you like. So this is some sensible law to ensure that we do the right thing by these people.We did have a good select committee process as discussed. The recommendations that came through were very technical in nature but I think they can be summarised as just providing absolute certainty. Yes there were only three submitters but they pointed to the risks associated with ongoing ambiguity and to the extent that we could be as precise as possible in respect of a couple of the components in the draft bill they thought that would be useful. In particular the definition of “qualifying claimant” was an area and again the Financial Assistance Package eligibility requirements were an opportunity for us to further tighten the definition.I think we have done some good work—if I can say so—as a collective committee. I think we are well served by the officials who are guiding us through what are pretty technical legislative amendments to make sure we get the effect that we are wanting through this proposal. Ultimately this is ensuring that those who do qualify and should qualify for theFinancial Assistance Package are enabled to do so through good enabling legislation. As we know through this process it is potentially around 70 properties. It might not sound like a lot in the context of the many thousands who have been through this process but for those 70—for those families—this legislation will enable them to get the right outcome. I obviouslycommend this bill to the House and look forward to the further discussions of the Committee of the whole House which no doubt will be pending. Thank you.