Kuriger BarbaraBARBARA KURIGER (National—Taranaki - King Country): That was a very good speech starting off by saying that the member was not going to be political and then accusing the Opposition of scaremongering. Actually Mr McAnulty this is not scaremongering; this is genuine concern for our racetrack owners around the country. As we know racing is an important part of the economy—particularly in our rural areas—involving $1.6 billion in revenue and around 18000 jobs. I've got some significant racing interests in my electorate of Taranaki - King Country—in fact all the way through it. Yes racing has been in decline and that's more in terms of the stakes rather than in terms of the breeding. We actually breed some very good horses in this country but when it comes to the racing stakes it's been very hard for the industry and trainers to actually have a really good go at it because the stakes aren't very high. That's basically because as we know there are a large number of racetracks and racing venues in this country. We recognise the need for change in the industry. We are supporting the intent of this bill and we are supporting it to first reading as we look to help the racing industry transform into the competitive market that it does have the potential to be. But where we disagree and where we want to have a good discussion at select committee is that this bill gives too much power to the Minister when it comes to decisions around these racing venues and racing tracks around the country. In particular we can't support Subpart 2 of Part 1 in its current form because this Subpart 2 refers to the transfer of assets and surplus venues. Really this will be like a red rag to a bull to many in rural provincial New Zealand. Now when Minister Faafoi spoke before he said that during this process the preferred approach would be negotiation but then following that he said these clauses are a backstop for the Minister which allows that Minister to allocate property to the code. So then is this really a genuine negotiation? It's a negotiation but if you don't do what the Minister wants you to do the Minister has the power to step in and actually make that approach on behalf of the particular racecourse or the race venue. Like our previous National speaker Nathan Guy I would encourage a significant number of people to put submissions in on this bill. I believe we will get a significant number because this could end up with some of the racing club land being confiscated and given back to particular codes when that's not the wish of the people in particular communities that have put their time and effort in. There's a real pride in communities in some of these venues and they're not just racing venues either I must say. In some communities a lot of those venues are used for other types of events. So clause 25 that allows the Order in Council recommended by the Minister to grab these properties if an agreement can't be reached by local clubs is a step too far for the National caucus because we believe in private property rights and we know that these people have put a lot of effort into this over a period of time. I just wanted to make reference to the TAB because there's a lot of discussion around the TAB and its ownership and how it will work out through this bill. We hear a lot about betting and gambling and I just want to say at this point in time that actually the betting and gambling thing is a red herring when it comes to specifically stating this around the racing industry. Once upon a time the racing industry was the place where people went to take their bets but I think it's already been stated today that you can pretty much bet on anything now. You can bet on many codes of sports you can bet on things that aren't codes of sport and I don't want to see anybody throughout this process use betting and gambling as any excuse to push back on the racing industry because it's a wonderful industry. While I don't go often I always enjoy a day at the races and we in the National caucus are supporting this bill to select committee and then looking forward to some sensible changes around Subpart 2. So thank you Mr Speaker.