Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi): Thank you very much Madam Speaker. It's an interesting bill this. We've said that we'll support it at first reading and see where things go from there. There's been some discussion about balance. Just thinking about the risk involved we've got a low risk of something that takes place but would have serious consequences if it did so that's the context for thinking about the need for fuel resilience. Others have commented on the plausible fuel disruptions" that might take place for a number of different reasons—and that wording is from the explanatory note—which are things like the geopolitical situation particularly in this moment in time with the war in Eastern Europe among other things. Of course the tides of geopolitical change come in and go out but suffice to say we always will need fuel resilience and of course particularly we're talking about fossil fuels at the moment and in due course that will change too. But the bill does contemplate actually other types of fuel in relation to which we also need to be resilient. So I don't have a lot of comments to offer at this stage. I will note actually the defined term of "obliged persons" and I'm trying to catch the eye of the member opposite who has given me grief before in a parliamentary speech in which I used the word "orientated" and I meant "oriented" of course with "orientation" being the abstract noun in this case. A colleague of that member said "obligated persons" a number of times. Hon Member: "Obliged"—"obliged". CHRIS PENK: Actually she said "obligated parties" which is wrong—you know it's a double whammy to be fair. But I'm going to say "obliged persons" because I know that to be correct and I hope that the member who I won't name—but I think all I'll say is that the Hon David Clark seems to know what I'm talking about. Anyway so minimum fuel stockholding obligation—that's an MSO as defined—sees fuel importers who have these obligations they've got to retain a certain amount and they in turn are able to draw fuel from bulk storage facilities. It seems to be a right and responsibility kind of balance. So just referring to that fact that there might be different types of fuel in the future to which this would apply if so then that mix of obligations or rights and responsibilities would apply to them. That's as far as I can tell from the bill as we've seen it so far. I suppose there's a question about whether there's a "Henry VIII" provision in the sense that this would potentially apply to green fuels and that could be a matter of regulation. I say that because the bill tells us that it would be a matter that could be imposed by "regulations in the future"—there we go I've found it. So that's something to look forward to discussing at perhaps the select committee. I understand that the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee will have that dubious honour and good luck to them. I won't be subbing in if I can help it. Anyway so that's the aim. It's to smooth the peaks and troughs and the fluctuations of the fuel supply thereby ensuring its security for all the kinds of reasons that we need it. For that reason I'll go no further at this point except only to say the National Party does support the bill and we commend it to the House and to the select committee to which it will soon be sent."