Belich CamillaCAMILLA BELICH (Labour): Thank you Mr Chair. It's a pleasure to be able to take a call my first call in this particular committee stage. I just thought that given we have the Minister here and we also have here the chair of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee and a number of the committee members it'll be an excellent opportunity just to talk to the Minister a wee bit about this slightly unprecedented change that's happened as a result of the select committee process and the change from the proposed 30 percent discount to the 50 percent discount. I think people deserve to know Minister what exactly went through your head when you were deciding that and the logic and reasoning for continuing with that change within the bill. I think that's a really important thing to go over before we move into the subsequent reading of this bill.I wanted to also mention a few of the amendments in the name of my colleague Arena Williams. So this particular part that we're referring to is subpart 2 in clause 15 which amends Schedule 1. There's been a change there. It was originally drafted to be 53 and the change from 30 percent to 50 percent has changed that to 38. Now my colleague Arena Williams has suggested a number of further reductions in this area changing 38 with 37 38 to 36 basically providing a number of other options for the Minister to consider. And as there has been a lot of openness in this particular process to consider different rates of discount that would apply to hybrid electric road-user charge for those vehicles I would be really interested to know whether the Minister has considered those.Also I'd be interested to know the conversations that the Minister has had with the chair of the select committee with his advisers around accepting this particular reduction in the rate; if the Minister in the future is going to be so welcoming of changes at the select committee process. And why in fact if the Minister was sure that his proposal was correct when he initially presented this bill to the House has he not presented an Amendment Paper following the change at the select committee process? And as my colleague Arena Williams touched on earlier does that mean that the initial proposal was deficient in some way or has the reasoning or the fundamental thinking behind the imposition of this particular piece of legislation changed?I think it is important to allow the Minister time to answer those questions and to just go through with the committee the relatively significant change from first reading to select committee and now unchanged in the committee stage.I also would just like to give the Minister the opportunity to put on the record once and for all how much of an impact did the timing of this legislation and the work required to put an amendment through influence his decision to accept the particular proposal from the select committee.So some important questions for the Minister on a relatively unusual process that has been taken in relation to this particular bill. Not one that I oppose necessarily and I'd be interested to hear the Minister's view on that but I think it's important that the Minister clarifies how we ended up here and why.