Curran ClareCLARE CURRAN (Labour—Dunedin South): I will just take another short call on Part 4 of this bill. Before I start can I just clarify and correct a comment I made in my earlier contribution which was that the money owed from the Mainzeal collapse was around $161 million to $163 million—it was in fact $153 million. It is important to get that right. I have also taken on board the Chair's comments around the questions that need to be asked and the reference to submissions.Can I pose a question to the Minister in the chair Jonathan Coleman around the definition of liquid assets" and what his analysis is of the quantum of liquid assets that—because I note and I am referring here to the submission from Civil Contractors New Zealand where it said that "The current requirements mean that a very significant amount of liquid assets ($250 million according to the 2014 MBIE Regulatory Impact Statement or a minimum of $600 million according to recent industry estimates) will be required to be held by clients and contractors when the new regime takes effect on 31 March 2017."I think it would be helpful for the Committee of the whole House if the Minister was able to use his vast knowledge of this particular issue and actually provide some clarity to the Committee around what sort of quantum we are talking about because there is a big difference between $250 million and $600 million. I think that is probably quite important. So I am asking the Minister whether he can actually address that question before we end this part in the Committee. I do think it is also important because we have touched on many things in this part of the bill—and thanks to my colleague Kris Faafoi who spelt out the difficulties that the Commerce Committee had in trying to grapple with the process part of it.It is really important to note that the 31 March date—which is next Friday; it is not this Friday but next Friday—which is so important and which is why we must pass all of these bills this week is not retrospective. The new regime around retentions which relates to the Act passed last year that amended the Construction Contracts Act—that retention process that has been put in place where retention moneys have to be kept in trust or through using that other instrument can apply only from 31 March 2017. When we were before the select committee we heard from the likes of Civil Contractors New Zealand which virtually begged us to get this legislation through as quickly as possible so that we would have these protections in place.We are supporting this but I think it is important too for the Committee to hear how this process played out why it played out and what the cost has been to New Zealand and to the construction industry around this and why it is so important that we get a retention process in place that actually works. I am concerned. Having read through this again tonight I have been thinking: "OK so how are we going to measure that it's working? Is it by the fact that there are fewer collapses?". What kind of monitoring or involvement is actually going to be had with the industry to ensure that these mechanisms for the retention of moneys are actually being effective and that is through the trust process and through the other instruments such as conversion to bonds. We are talking about multimillion-dollar contracts. We must get this right. The construction industry is important to New Zealand."