Doocey MattMATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): Thank you very much Madam Chair. I rose so many times and didn't get the call; now you've picked me and you've caught me out! Anyway—hey I just wanted to start by acknowledging the Minister's comment about the holiday he had through Te Kūiti I think and every 75 kilometres he was able to get a charger. And it kind of reminds me that that was actually I think if we look back a former National Government initiative to have a charging station every 75 kilometres. And now I think of it when I think of Greg O'Connor's quite in-depth report back in the second reading about National's legacy within electric vehicles (EVs) it's disappointing he missed that one out because I thought we do have a very good narrative and a very good legacy in this space.I want to start with new section 167B(5) which talks about the Minister must not recommend the making of regulations unless the Minister is satisfied—(a) that the fees and charges are appropriate to increase supply and availability … (b) that the imposition and level of charges … are appropriate [for] international and domestic climate change ambitions". And it does strike me in a pragmatic sense that that would be potentially one provision to look at where we can look at the inequity of people who need certain cars around potentially their occupations; and why we could not have in there "if the Minister was not satisfied that certain groups of people didn't have choice" because as we know with this "ute tax" some New Zealanders are not going to have choice under this scheme.And that's part of the issue isn't it? The title the Land Transport (Clean Vehicles) Amendment Bill—very benign but I suppose when you look at new section 167B(5) that would be the place to ensure that all New Zealanders were supported under a very benign title because you know let's be very clear: if you're in the regions if you're in North Canterbury you've got petrol going up you're paying your road-user charges your tax the National Land Transport Fund's been raided again and taken out of the regions for pet projects like light rail in Auckland and now you're being told as a tradie and a farmer in North Canterbury that you're going to have to pay a "ute tax". And the Government even cancelled your motorway—the Woodend Bypass. So you know this is pretty unfair stuff.And then also it does strike me once the Minister's responded to that that maybe under new section 167(A)(4) where it talks about "Different rates of fees or charges or both may be prescribed or fixed in respect of different classes of vehicles or on any other differential basis."—it does sort of occur to me under that "differential basis" wording I mean could there be a category for people that do not have choice? Because ultimately I don't think anyone disagrees—let's incentivise EVs.Although the Minister did make a statement—I wrote it down—that consumers and I'm paraphrasing here a bit would save money; we all know you know the importers and the retailers have put the price of EVs up. So I'm not sure anyone's going to save money; some people are going to make money. But of course it's actually disappointing that with a group of New Zealanders who are increasingly marginalised under this Labour Government—and that's regional New Zealanders—there's actually no pragmatic solution within Part 1 of where they clearly could be supported when they do not have a choice. And I'll be interested to hear the Minister's response to that. Thank you Madam Chair."