Utikere TangiTANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North): Kia orana thank you Mr Speaker. I do want to take a call on this referral motion.Can I thank my colleague the Hon Dr Duncan Webb for tabling an amendment. What I take from his contribution is that he has done so within the context of the House currently sitting under urgency—something that members of this House are becoming very familiar with unfortunately—but also that the ability for the select committee perhaps to fully scrutinise in a way that is appropriate would be better served by effectively this House issuing as part of an instruction of the referral a requirement for the select committee to not sit on a Saturday. Whilst that might improve the referral motion I still have some fundamental concerns about the very short time frame that this bill is seeking to have in front of a select committee. I did touch on that in my contribution earlier and did indicate that I would be seeking a call to speak to that later.The House is in a circumstance at the moment where it will as we understand it sit in urgency. It'll sit through till midnight tomorrow after commencing at 9 a.m. in the morning with the possibility of Thursday and who knows possibly into Friday. Now my colleague Dr Webb talks about the wellbeing of parliamentarians and I think that is a very salient point: that there would be members of this Parliament who would then potentially roll into a Saturday to hear submissions in a rather discrete period of time. So I'm supportive of Dr Webb's tabled amendment because it basically will allow for a committee if it is a nine-day period still to still use its time more effectively. I think actually members of the public would think that's the same view.I also make the point that the House is in urgency. Part of the urgency motion that the Minister moved is the repeal of the Auckland regional fuel tax. Members of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee no doubt will be involved with that particular item. So again it's not simply about members re-diverting their attention from being in the House or being in select committee but the nature of items that have formed part of the urgency motion are such that there are dual responsibilities to members on the Transport and Infrastructure Committee. Certainly while members may be subbed off as a member of that committee myself I would like to hear the submissions that are presented; those who will avail themselves of even a truncated period of time to speak to the submissions to raise the issues and the concerns.So while I am supportive of Dr Webb's tabled amendment I still think that the nine days in total is still completely inadequate and unsatisfactory. So on the one hand certainly support the amendment but the substantive motion still is significantly deficient. Because we are talking about a piece of potential legislation as my colleague Camilla Belich touched on involves primary legislation. Not only that it includes secondary legislation and that it also inserts some new schedules as well. And that happens from time to time: members opposite; members on this side of the House will know that.But by allowing a simple nine-day window for these matters to be addressed and actually for people to get organised and to submit to the process I think is shutting the door on these individuals. Let's remember that this is a bill that yes the Minister earlier talked about had been signalled by the former Government. This is a Government that has decided to leave it very very late in the piece towards its 100th day—that's what the Minister indicated in terms of his explanation earlier this afternoon.But this is also something that has only recently come to the attention of the House that it's going to be on the Order Paper in terms of being dealt with under urgency. Now that means there are people out in the community who will not have known that this was actually something that is going to be scrutinised by the Parliament. Yes there's an argument for saying Well you know things were due to expire at the end of March." but there are people out in the community who undoubtedly will not know. Actually even with a nine-day period of select committee—where usually it's months as we know—this will probably go through that process of "the House is of that view" and still there will be people who would have liked to have submitted on this bill who will not have even known that it's actually made its way through the House or to a select committee.So to say that we're going to refer this for nine days is completely inadequate. The only explanation that we have heard in this House as to why the nine days is related to the 100-day plan for this Government. That is the only reason.Camilla Belich: Arbitrary.TANGI UTIKERE: Now—it is arbitrary. So surely there are opportunities that need to be made available.I want to just note that the departmental disclosure statement that I have touched on previously—there is a lot I think being relied on the fact that there was public consultation back in 2022. A lot has happened since 2022 and there might be individuals outside of some of these particular freight and trucking sectors where this is what it said: most submissions were received from the freight and trucking sectors. Now there will be people like my constituent who sent an email through to me recently who indicated that actually he doesn't mind having to pay a road-user charge for his electric vehicle but he has real concerns about the weight variance. And this is the absolute mechanism by which those concerns would be aired. Now my concern is that by effectively truncating that period you are shutting off the opportunity for many to want to be able to contribute.So I won't go on any longer except to say that I think Dr Webb's tabled amendment is a sensible one in the circumstances. But that certainly in my view does not override the unfortunate circumstance that the substantive motion of nine days' referral to the select committee is currently before the House."