Dean JacquiHon JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): Well thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. It was very concerning in the first reading speech of the Hon Eugenie Sage when she noted that with regards to how money was going to be spent by conservation—I quote—[There is] a crisis in … threatened species". Well that seems an awfully long way away from providing tourism infrastructure and the comment by the Minister of Conservation was—Hon Eugenie Sage: They come to see them.Hon JACQUI DEAN: Ah there we are. So the conservation Minister has just confirmed over the House well "They come to see them." Yes they do. So does that mean that this tourist tax is what it looks like it appears to be? Is this tourist tax merely a blank cheque for Ministers to ply towards their pet projects? It certainly sounds like that and from the dearth of information and clarity in the bill and all the many questions that are raised in the regulatory impact statement (RIS) I am so looking forward to the committee of the whole House stage because I have a number of questions.I have a number of questions for whichever Minister is in the chair and I do hope they take it in turns. If it is the Hon Kelvin Davis I have questions around the tourism spend. If it is the Hon Iain Lees-Galloway I have questions around the Immigration Act and the application of that. If it's the Hon Eugenie Sage I have questions about how it can be that a tourist tax gets distributed so widely and diluted through the conservation estate.Angie Warren-Clark: Read the bill.Hon JACQUI DEAN: Well you see "Read the bill."—there's not much there. If I could direct the member opposite who just resumed her seat if she cast her eye over the bill it might confirm to her as well that this bill is extremely vague unclear and if I might say when it was hurriedly thrown together on Tuesday evening I don't know that the officials really had their hearts in it.I want to just mention a matter of concern to me. In the RIS under section B "Summary Impacts:" it asks "Who are the main expected beneficiaries and what is the nature of the expected benefit?" That's the question asked and answered in the RIS. The RIS says no specific decisions have been made where the tourist tax revenue will be spent. Well I suppose that's fair enough because the bill is just going through the House and with the benefit of a select committee process we might have had a bit more direction. The only direction we've had so far is the Minister of Conservation who is welcoming with open arms the carte blanche blank cheque which she will spend in whatever way she likes because—to quote—"They just want to come and see the threatened species." So if that isn't loose I don't know what is and if there is a danger signal in there about the lack of rigour in this bill and by the receiving Ministers then we should be very very concerned about that.In the committee of the whole House stage I'd also like to see the Hon Nanaia Mahuta take a turn in the seat because she is also one of the receiving Ministers and it does say in the RIS who the main expected beneficiaries are. It notes they are the local government agencies responsible for most public tourism infrastructure. So I am expecting the Hon Nanaia Mahuta to come down and take a turn in the chair to answer questions in the absence of a select committee process. This is after all—they tell us—the most transparent open and kind Government in the history of New Zealand. Let's just see them deliver on that."