Dyson RuthHon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills): I am delighted to be able to contribute in this second reading speech on the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill (No 2). Can I begin by acknowledging the Minister who introduced the bill the Hon Dr Nick Smith and say that this was one of the very few things that he did that was a move in the right direction but it still should be acknowledged that it was. Unlike the members of the National Party who weren't aware of the submissions and the changes—Hon Dr David Clark: Even the clocks are right twice a day!Hon RUTH DYSON: —that's right—that were made at the select committee as a result of the submissions I'm going to explain those to the House because they were really fundamental to the point of the bill to the rights of tenancies and to the use of evidence in determining outcomes. Those two points were missing from the work that the Hon Dr Nick Smith did; so I want to acknowledge the current Minister the Hon Phil Twyford and thank him for being prepared to stand up and say We're not going to do things on a whim or because we've heard a rumour or because some people are scared about things; we're going to do things that are principled that protect the investment of landlords but give rights to tenants and use science and evidence as the basis of decision making."I think that is great and I want to congratulate the Hon Phil Twyford for moving this bill in that direction.Dan Bidois: Tell us about your science and innovation around oil and gas!ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Order! Not my science.Hon RUTH DYSON: I also want to acknowledge and congratulate the members of the Governance and Administration Committee. I was previously a member of that committee which has been renamed but I want to particularly commend the style of chairing by Brett Hudson because he does chair those meetings—I've attended many in the last 12 months—in a collaborative inclusive way which is respectful of submitters and respectful of the members of the committee and as a result gets a better outcome. The process is important to getting a better outcome and you can see that from the bill that's been returned to the House.We know the main point of the bill was to look at the liability for damage to rental premises that was caused by a tenant the issue of the contamination of rental premises and tenancies in rental premises that are unlawful for residential use. So those were the three points of the bill as it was introduced and they remain—those three points remain the same. But as I mentioned earlier there were some substantial changes made and I just want to mention them now in contradiction to the members of the National Party who incorrectly said it was returned in the same state.The biggest changes to the bill are in the contamination provisions. The bill's been amended so that the word "methamphetamine" is actually removed—most references to the word "methamphetamine" have been removed—and instead that word has been replaced by the more generic "contaminants". Now that's a sensible approach. Although every single member in this House totally rejects the use of methamphetamine—there wouldn't be any debate about that; there's debate about how to solve the scourge that we've got in our communities but nobody would be inclined to support the use—I'm sure that members of the House also agree that the more generic broader word "contaminants" is more appropriate in this situation.The second change which I also alluded to briefly in my introduction was the fact that our Government prefers using evidence and science as the basis of decisions. So when Sir Peter Gluckman the previous prime ministerial science adviser issued a report on contamination the three parties on this side of the House read it and took notice of it and it has been really used as the basis for the new procedure for dealing with contaminants. So instead of the tens of millions of dollars that were wasted by testing which didn't prove anything instead of the testing that ended up with families being evicted from their homes and often having nowhere to go—and again tens of millions of dollars of taxpayer money being used to clean houses in a way that may have been unnecessary—we now have a process. We're using science as the base and I should acknowledge Sir Peter Gluckman who drove this thinking. There will now be a regulatory regime which will ensure that that science is put to best use. Better use of taxpayers' money fair treatment of tenants and landlords and science as the basis of decisions—I like that approach and again I want to commend the Minister.The second change that is substantial in the bill as reported back from the committee is ensuring that tenants have a right to know the level of their liability for careless damage. The legislation as introduced by the Hon Dr Nick Smith did not have that as an entitlement and in the view of the parties on this side of the House it should be. So the change has been made so that the bill now has a requirement that if the property is insured the new tenancy agreements must state it and include insurance information such as the insurance excess. If the property is not insured the landlord must include a statement to that effect so that the tenants are aware of their liability: whether the property they're renting is insured or not—what they will be up for basically under the other provisions of this legislation. I think those two changes are an improvement on the original legislation. They shift the balance of entitlement for the tenants in terms of having factual information about their liability and they use science as the basis of a regulatory regime in dealing with contamination. So I think they're thoughtful. I think they're fair. They're just. They enhance the bill. They do genuinely improve it.The third provision that I mentioned in the bill as it was introduced has had no substantial changes. Neither the submitters nor the select committee nor I assume the Minister—because there has been no indication of a Supplementary Order Paper to be tabled in respect of that. They seem to support it as it was introduced.I want to again acknowledge the work of the Hon Dr Nick Smith and thank him for that one small but at least positive contribution that he made in his time as Minister of housing. I acknowledge the work that the Hon Phil Twyford is doing not just in this space but in so many areas to address the housing crisis that we inherited from the previous National Government. We will again have a country where young people will be able to aspire to buy a home where people who are in rental properties will have security and will be in a warm and dry home. That's the sort of country that we will again be proud of in terms of the housing situation of our citizens. Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker.Bill read a second time."