Brooking Rachel; Costello CaseyHon RACHEL BROOKING (Labour—Dunedin): Thank you Madam Chair. Thank you for that smile as well. I want to traverse—hopefully I'll get to three points in this contribution; three questions that I'll get to: one about urgency one about the purpose and the changes to the purpose from various different versions of the principal Act and one about a tabled amendment in my name.Firstly on the urgency I know the Minister says that she has answered this question a number of times and it is because of an election and a 100-day plan. But that is not good enough. Because what we are doing here is we're not just using urgency to have a bill introduced and then go to first reading and then maybe even a quick select committee process. No no no. What we are having here is a bill that we only saw yesterday and that we are now debating in all-stages urgency.An all-stages urgency is very different from using a bit of urgency here and there to progress a bill at pace. Obviously there are a lot of sitting days in that 100 days and there would have been ample opportunity for the Government to be true to all their policy decisions—which of course I think are terrible but I'm commenting here on the process. Their terrible policy decisions around environment around labour laws around health could all have been introduced had a first reading gone off to select committees and come back for the second reading and committee stage and not be using this all-stages urgency process. This is just the worst lawmaking process that is possible really anywhere in the world.Hon Member: No you took that prize.Hon RACHEL BROOKING: So I would like the Minister to make all stages—and now the members on the other side are saying Oh you did it." I note again that the use of urgency is different from the use of all-stages urgency. There's an important difference there because there is no time for scrutiny.Now I'm going to move on to one of these issues about scrutiny and this is in clause 5 which says that section 3A is replaced. Section 3A is the purpose of the Act or the purposes of the Act. We've heard the Minister say that what we're doing in this piece of legislation is going back to exactly what was in place before the last Government's amendments in 2022. But in fact there are some differences. If you look at section 3A the purposes in clause 5 the new purposes of this Act compared with a version before those 2022 amendments there are some changes. Maybe they are small but I don't know why they are there.So for instance the numbering is different and at paragraphs (c) and (d) there's the new (c)—I think from my looking at it—"to reduce the appeal of regulated products to children and young people; and (d) to minimise harm from regulated products in particular to children and young people;" and so it goes. Then the rest is the same but then there is a difference in wording at (g) which is "to regulate the safety of regulated products;". Previously it was to regulate the safety of vaping products and smokeless tobacco products. I don't know the reason for that change—the Minister could comment on that. At (h) there is "to monitor and regulate the presence of the constituents of regulated products and their emissions;". So the word "harmful" was there after the "presence". So it did read "the presence of harmful constituents of regulated products and their emissions".There may be a great policy reason for this change but I don't know it and this is the only time we get to scrutinise this bill. That takes quite a little bit of time going back and forward between different versions of the of the bills and of the Act quickly. But I would like to spend more time on those changes of the purposes and I just note the additions of "to reduce the appeal of regulated products to children and young people;" and "to minimise harm from regulated products in particular to children and young people;". These are both similar to what the wording was in the 2022 change but is different from the primary legislation before that 2022 change.Related to that is my tabled amendment and that asks—[Bell rung] Madam Chair?CHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh): Rachel Brooking.Hon RACHEL BROOKING: Thank you Madam Chair. So going to my tabled amendment—noting that these parts of the purpose relate to children and young people and I think that seems to be a good policy decision; I'm sure nobody in the committee would question it.So what this amendment does is to introduce after clause 9 a new clause 9A and insert a new section 20OA into the legislation. That part of the legislation is around the regulation of tobacco. So what this is is to add in section 20OA "Proximity of tobacco retailers to schools" and that is that the Director-General must ensure when granting a person approval to be an approved smoked tobacco retailer that any premises is not within 1 kilometre of a school. Obviously the intention of that amendment is to support what we have in the purposes of the Act as amended by this bill and as in fact the purposes of the Act and the amendments from 2022 but not as I said before in the original piece of legislation pre its 2022 amendments.So I'm very interested if the Minister can tell us about why she's kept in those two—paragraphs (c) and (d) in the bill—provisions around children in the purpose and hopefully we will all be in agreement about why she's doing that. But then also could she comment on why it would be useful to have my tabled amendment—there's probably some other similar tabled amendments as well—about actually giving effect to that purpose which is to reduce the appeal of regulated products to children and young people and to minimise harm from regulated products in particular to children and young people. Obviously if you cannot have premises near a school that is a good way of achieving that purpose. Thank you.Hon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health): I think it's important just to reiterate here that the bill we're discussing is not undoing anything that's currently in place. So we are looking to change the legislation but none of these measures are actually implemented as of yet so I think we need to work forward from that position. So that refers to the driving down demand I think question that was raised. I think that that's why we keep going back to the statistics: we have driven down demand significantly with what's in place and our young smokers have been a significant reduction—down to just 19000 young smokers now—so we will continue to work on those aspects that are working.I think I'll just respond to the clarifying about exactly the purpose being exactly the same as previously. I think just to clarify the previous purpose statement reflected the previous Government's policies regarding the regulation of smoked tobacco. This included a purpose that was intended to reflect the equity focus of those policies. Because these policies have been removed from the Act the purpose statement was revised to reflect the substance of what remains in the Act. For this reason the new purpose statement largely reflects the purpose statement that was in the Act before the previous amendments."