Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): I couldn't resist a chuckle when the Minister Grant Robertson was describing what Part 4 did in the context of clause 168, where he quoted the section safeguarding the independence of the bank. Because, actually, subclause 168(1) refers to the operational independence as it relates to a particular person or persons—that is, the Minister can't direct the bank to go after individuals or groups of individuals, which is absolutely right; that's not the Minister's role. But it is ironic in the extreme that he tends to reinforce the operational independence of the bank, when the bill as a whole actually undermines that in my view. The simple question that National members have asked themselves in their consideration of their support for this bill was this: does the bill make stronger or weaker the operational independence of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand? And the answer is inevitably "weaker". In fact, Part 4 then goes on to list a number of ways in which the Minister of State Services and the Minister of Finance may give plenty of directions, instructions, remits, and so on—that is a greater power than in the 1989 Act. So I point that out at Part 4, my mirth at the irony of the introductory remarks the Minister made, which were in fact directed at protecting individuals and groups, not his overall influence.