Williams ArenaARENA WILLIAMS (Labour—Manurewa): Thank you Mr Chair. To put the counterfactual to the Hon David Parker's arguments and this could have been teased out at a select committee process—we could have heard from EECA about how they play their role within industries who they take a regulatory role with. If it's not the role of EECA to consider the role of industry players in the car sector in the way that they self-regulate currently their standards for cars that they bring in then isn't it not useful to have protections for consumers of those cars? So if the Minister is trying to change the way that the cleaning vehicle standards works not for a policy goal of reducing emissions and of improving energy efficiency across New Zealand's various sectors but if he does have a different policy goal and that is to empower consumers to have more choice in the vehicle market then isn't that the role of the Commerce Commission?Neither of those policy goals which the Minister may have here—I think he's being a bit clearer that he has the first one which is about an energy efficiency clean vehicle standard. But neither of those policy goals are met by the purpose of clause 170 of the Land Transport Act being amended with this clean vehicle standard that he is proposing. Because it's relevant for us in committee stage when we haven't had a select committee to consider particularly under Standing Order 310 which I alluded to earlier the purpose of the principal Act. The principal Act doesn't have a purpose of protecting consumers and it doesn't have a purpose of setting an efficiency standard across all sectors. It's purpose is really clear; it's to reduce carbon dioxide emissions across the vehicle fleet.This amendment could do entirely the opposite of that. It's possible that this amendment—and my colleague Camilla Belich has more to say about this. But it's quite possible that the Minister's amendment would introduce a dirty vehicle standard because this House will have no oversight over that. It's not being done in primary legislation; it's being done via Orders in Council. So if it's the policy position of the Minister to in fact create a dirty vehicle standard then that would completely fly in the face of the purpose of the Land Transport Act which he is seeking to amend.That's fine. That's a choice that's available to this Minister. It's a choice that he will be answerable to voters for. We will not be able to scrutinise that on this side of the House. But it's not fine to put that in an Act which has an explicit purpose of reducing the carbon dioxide emissions. That would fly in the face of our legislative design principles. It would fly in the face of proper lawmaking. It's not OK for the Minister to just say that because there was a clean vehicle standard in the Land Transport Act before he's sort of powerless to change that. There was a clean vehicle standard which reduced carbon dioxide emissions—that's the point.So I want the Minister to stand and tell us well should he be deleting the clean vehicle standard entirely and creating some kind of other energy measure or some kind of other consumer protection? Why are we in the Land Transport Act at all if his policy goal is not to reduce carbon dioxide emissions?