Wade-Brown CeliaCELIA WADE-BROWN (Green): Thank you Madam Chair. I'd like to bring some local government experience to this area. My questions will relate to what this actually reduces the spending on. I actually had the waste portfolio at Wellington City Council in 2008 when this excellent bill became an Act and some of you may understand how robust and long-lasting a good green bill can be because this was brought in not by the larger parties but by the work of Nándor Tánczos. So I ask the Minister to reflect on how this bill has lasted through various changes of Government and until now has begun to really reduce waste.I'd like to ask the Minister whether she agrees that changing the breadth of areas that can be funded from this bill—and none of us disagree with remediating landfills and those areas that have been added; we just are concerned about removing the funding from the preventative side of things.Is the Minister concerned that by widening the application of the levy we will do less on product stewardship on the six products—there are only six product areas: plastic packaging; tires; electrical and electronic products colloquially known as e-waste; agrichemicals and their containers; refrigerants and other synthetic greenhouse gases another area where waste and climate change connect; and farm plastics. Those were all agreed in I think 2020. Surely the Minister must want some more product stewardship at the top of the cliff. I see the remediation activities and the dealing with the effects of climate change as another example of this Government dealing with the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff rather than investing in long-term intergenerational prevention measures.So if the Minister could address what areas are not being funded because of the transfer if she could address the areas of what products should have some stewardship applied—this is meant to be an innovative process that helps manufacturers redesign their processes.If you look at other countries—let's take a car example because I know everyone in New Zealand seems to be obsessed with cars—the new Volvo has been produced—I think it uses wool so that will keep certain members in this Chamber very happy in its fabric; it recycles materials; and its embodied energy is far lower. Now New Zealand is not manufacturing cars but we do manufacture many other products and also we import things—I think maybe some limitations on what's imported; making sure that you can recycle it. Demanding that the individual household sorts—instead of putting it on the system would the Minister agree that relying on individual action with confusing and inadequate labelling is far inferior to fixing the system the manufacture and the import of goods that cannot be recycled and that we should be able to fund that prevention of waste prevention of pollution using this levy?I'm sure the Minister would agree that this is a good partnership at the moment between local and central government the levy sharing. It might be interesting to look into a little bit more whether the local government share is being used wisely or whether it's just being used to prop up some fairly ineffective kerbside recycling in some places. Thank you.