Simpson ScottHon SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): Thank you Madam Chair. As has been indicated this Part 2 relates to the amendments to the principal Act the Land Transport Management Act of 2003 and other enactments. There are a number of quite technical changes that need to be implemented to give the new legislation effect that will impact on other pieces of legislation. There are a couple of matters that I want to raise with the Minister and seek his guidance and clarification on because that will not only I think help me understand the rationale for the changes that are required to the principal Act but also I think it will help the sector and people who have to deal with the new regime on a day-to-day basis.I want to first turn to new section 9A inserted by clause 16 which relates to Accounting for clean car vehicle discount". Now this sets up a requirement for the agency in its annual report to in the financial year to which it relates contain the following information concerning the clean vehicle discount scheme. It will require the agency to report on "(a) the revenue received from charges paid … (b) any positive amount from a previous year … (c) the expenses and capital expenditure for the purpose of administering the scheme including—(i) rebates provided … (ii) actual and reasonable costs incurred by the Agency in relation to the administration …; and (iii) any funding provided to the Agency by the Crown for the purposes of the scheme and repayment of that funding." And it's to that last point that I want to particularly draw attention to: "any funding provided to the Agency by the Crown for the purposes of the scheme and repayment of that funding."On my simple reading of it it sounds like there is an expectation that for a period of time there will need to be a top-up provided by the Crown in order to make good the payments that have already been made in terms of people who have bought vehicles under the scheme because the paying out of subsidies has already taken place. But what is not already taking place is the collection of revenue from people who for instance want to buy vehicles that are required for their work for their farming for their trade or for their business. They can't buy a vehicle that is going to fit into the criteria that would warrant for them an option to receive a subsidy under the scheme.So my question is: what does the Minister anticipate the range and funding underwrite that will be required by the Crown? And when does he think that that will get into positive territory? What are the numbers? What is essentially the break-even point for the scheme in terms of the dollars and cents involved?I want to also speak to matters in new section 101A inserted by clause 19 "Monitoring matters relating to clean car vehicle discount scheme". It says that "(1) The Secretary for the purpose of evaluating the performance of the clean vehicle discount scheme may monitor and review" and then there are a range of things including "(a) the revenue used by the Agency for the purposes of administering the scheme; … (b) the number and nature of rebates provided in relation to the carbon dioxide emissions…." and then there are several others. It then in subsection (2) says "The Secretary may in writing request the Agency to provide any information that is reasonably required and relevant to enable the Secretary to carry out the monitoring specified in subsection (1)." So I'm keen to know from the Minister what will be in his view matters that may be reasonably required and relevant to enable the secretary to carry out the monitoring specified. It's been my experience over years both in business and also in this House that where the term "reasonably" is used in legislation or regulation that's open to a wide range of interpretation and what is reasonable to one person may be completely unreasonable to another.Then the other quick matter that I want to raise is in relation to style really and maybe the Minister can seek some guidance from officials. I'm referring to clause 23 which relates to section YA 1 amended its definitions and it says in section YA 1 "insert in its appropriate alphabetical order: clean vehicle discount scheme means the clean vehicle discount scheme administered by the New Zealand Transport Agency".Now members of the public and members of this House will know that a vast amount of taxpayer money has been spent on promoting and rebranding the New Zealand Transport Agency as Waka Kotahi and in fact that is now their preferred terminology. And yet in the legislation there appears to be no mention of the expensive and well-promoted new branding. I'm wondering what the style guide—and maybe the Minister has sought advice from Parliamentary Counsel as to what the style guide is. Are we in a situation where the new branding should be included in the regulations and legislation? Or indeed is that something that just applies to members of the public and to TV advertisements and radio advertisements and the comms team at the New Zealand Transport Agency which is not small by any manner of means? So it's really a question about drafting style and what is the Minister's preference in that regard."