ANDREW BAYLY (National—Port Waikato): Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to turn to the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act (CCCFA) issue. So I suppose my first question is: the bill, which is now the Act, provided for a differential approach to be taken to lender and for borrower—it was in section 9E. Why was it that the Minister subsequently allowed the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) to rewrite the Responsible Lending Code, which originally was about 62 pages, and turn it into this mammoth 102-page Responsible Lending Code, and to include things—specifically a diagram on page 25—that state that lenders are required under 4AK to obtain at least 90 days of transactional records from relevant banks to verify the expenses; to do benchmarking; and not, practically, make adjustments for that? So here is a document and a one-page diagram setting out how banks and responsible lenders should be looking at lending practices. Why on earth would a Minister pass regulations, that did not come back through the Finance and Expenditure Committee, to set out such a prescriptive approach that has led to an absolute carnage, in terms of lending, to both people wanting to get mortgages, right through to people trying to get lending for cars or other items? So that's the first question. Why did he allow this Responsible Lending Code to be so prescriptive and basically tell lenders how to go about assessing lending to borrowers?