Brown SimeonSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Madam Chair for the opportunity to take a call on this committee stage which I have a number of questions that I'd appreciate the Minister of Transport answering to the House and to the public about.The first question I have is in relation to clause 6 which replaces the 12-month temporary reduction period after the second temporary reduction period ends with five years. My question to the Minister is: what was the reason for deciding that the legislation should have a five-year period upon which the Government could continue to put in place the so-called temporary road-user charge (RUC) reduction scheme? What advice did the Minister receive around potential options in regards to the length of time that should be inserted into the bill? And ultimately why did the Government decide and settle on five years?I think the issue here is of course that we support the intent of the legislation which is to ensure that people who drive diesel vehicles—truckies tradies farmers—are able to get the same benefit as people who drive petrol vehicles but this indicates that the Government has a policy of wanting to continue to extend what is effectively their only cost of living measure they've been able to put in place for quite some time. So one I guess is: why did they choose that period? And I guess the secondary question is: is it the Government's intention to extend the road-user charge reduction scheme longer than 30 June which could easily have been put in place without having to put clause 6 into the piece of legislation?The second question I'd like to ask is in relation to those who have already purchased road-user charges since 1 February. Of course the Minister will be aware that the last time he announced the temporary reduction—I think was the fourth time he announced the reduction; this was the fifth I believe—was of course on 31 January. So people who have had to purchase road-user charges since 1 February when this announcement was made have had to pay the higher rate.So the question I have there is: for those who have had to pay the higher rate—even though the announcement was made on 1 February that this would be coming back to Parliament—how are those people going to be if at all reimbursed for those charges? Of course people who already owned a diesel vehicle may have had the ability to purchase those kilometres in advance and many of them would have. But for example if you had purchased a new diesel vehicle on 2 February you'd have to put at least some kilometres on to be able to drive it on the road. So those people would have had to have purchased those road-user charges at the higher rate. Then when they go and buy more they'll be able to get them at the reduced rate once this bill is passed. But will there be any compensation for those people? Because of course if they'd purchased a petrol vehicle on 2 February and gone down to the pump they would have been paying the lower rate of excise. So where's the fairness for those people? I'm sure the Minister will be able to answer that question and be able to articulate to those people who are very interested in that question.The third question is in relation to the assessments and that is in relation to the issue where the Minister talked about one of the other processes—he said in his first reading speech—one of the other processes that we built in and will continue to build in to this reduction are some controls to ensure that we manage against the possibility of excessive purchasing.So my question there is: what are the additional controls if any? How many assessments have been issued? For those people who have had issue assessments issued what happened when the RUC extension was put in place when this temporary RUC reduction was put in place; were they then having their assessments reversed? Of course some people would have had an assessment made that they had purchased too many kilometres when the first temporary RUC reduction was put in place. And then of course the Government chose to extend it but they may have already been issued with an assessment to pay a higher rate. But then those kilometres may have been actually a reasonable number of kilometres to use over what has now been effectively a 12-month—will eventually become sort of 15 months' worth of temporary road-user charge. So will those people—have they had to pay their assessments; will they have their assessments reimbursed?And of course there's again a fairness element in terms of people who yep may have purchased what would have been an excessive amount of kilometres for a three-month temporary road-user charge—or four months I think it was at the first time it was introduced—but that may not have been an excessive number if they'd known that the policy would have lasted until midway through 2023 which of course is some time after it was announced back in March 2022.So those are a range of questions which I hope the Minister will be able to give meaningful answers to this House because I note again when you read the regulatory impact statements officials have made it very clear they have not had time to be able to actually deal and address many of these issues. They were rushed last year it's been rushed again now and it's important that this House has confidence in that decision-making process and understands how those decisions were made.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): The question is that—Simon Court: Oh Madam Chair.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Just oh—Simon Court: Thank you Madam Chair.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): It's only because I'm so looking forward to dinner. Simon Court.