Woods MeganHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram): Thank you Mr Chairman. There's still a number of questions that I have about the labels and I'd like to thank the Minister and his officials for getting down copies that members in this Chamber can read so they can ask the questions. I have to say if I had to choose between the colour and the black and white version I'm going black and white. Blue's not really my colour. The Minister asked us to state a preference in terms for the kind of copy we want so when it comes for releasing the regulatory impact statement we'd quite like that whichever way—colour or black and white will work. But my question about this is whether the Minister sought any advice or gave any thought to other information that could be on the label. Of course Part 2 of the bill is all about what is the label and the changes that are being made to the label. One of the things that we do know is that in other jurisdictions where you have had increased uptake of electric vehicles (EVs)—so usually one of the triggers of getting rid of a rebate scheme is actually that you get to price parity between an EV and an internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle so that the need for there to be assistance is no longer necessary because there isn't that delta in terms of the capital expenditure. So there's a couple of ways in which this could be expressed on the label. I was giving this a great deal of thought and one of the things that I think would be the most useful way for it to be expressed on the label would be the marginal abatement cost that sat around that vehicle. So I want to know from the Minister: did he receive advice on the marginal abatement cost of this policy? If so what was that advice? What is the marginal abatement cost of both the Clean Car Discount but also the marginal abatement cost of removing this policy? I think this is the kind of information—the marginal abatement cost—that would help consumers to make really good decisions. They would know then in terms of the benefit that was flowing through to them. One of the things that I am mindful of is that it is very rare for climate change policies to have a negative marginal abatement cost. What I mean by negative abatement cost—it means that people will be better off because of the policy. Actually the Clean Car Discount was one of those policies that did have a marginal abatement cost—and certainly there is—which we released when we passed the law because it is useful to have that information. They had a marginal abatement cost per tonne of between minus $170 and $199.I want to know whether the Minister has received information on the marginal abatement costs of removing the policy—i.e. how much worse off New Zealanders are going to be or how much better off New Zealanders will be as a result of his policy change and whether he has given any thought for that being the kind of information that could be displayed on the label. Because it's not only the efficiency that consumers will want; it's important information. One of the things that we know and all the research shows us is actually people are doing their sums and working out whether that extra expenditure—that extra capital expenditure—upfront is something that makes sense for them and their families.