Bayly AndrewANDREW BAYLY (National—Port Waikato): Thank you Mr Speaker. Gee I thought we were going to have a decent contribution from that member but obviously she didn't have much to say which is pretty disappointing. Look it's an interesting bill this Fuel Industry Amendment Bill and I listened to my colleague Mr Stuart Smith give a good explanation as to why we're opposing it. Of course we do want to make sure that New Zealanders get access to fuel at competitive prices but as he noted there are five competitors and there is evidence of quite significant competition in certain areas. One area where there should be actually more availability and more competition is Tauranga and actually it might be helpful if the Government used some of its powers to actually help facilitate that because having another operator with a terminal gate and operating out of Tauranga would be helpful in terms of the supply in the upper North Island but unfortunately they weren't able to get a consent which is a bit of a shame.I think the big thing is—obviously this bill enables a Minister to set a terminal gate fee or price for specified engine fuels wholesale suppliers and bulk storage facilities. So the big issue is—and this is the big thing for us—this now takes what should be a competition issue managed by the Commerce Commission and now translates that and gives a Minister the power to determine stuff. We think in competition this is not a good practice to go down. If we have a Commerce Commission—and I know Labour put more money into funding the Commerce Commission—if you're going to have a Commerce Commission let it do its job let it operate and let it be the one that undertakes these types of inquiries and actually looks at how it's going to manage the market. Once you start getting Ministers involved in political decision-making it is a stretch that actually politicises this type of issue and we think from a policy perspective that's the wrong thing.The other thing is that it's actually very concerning that there's no criteria for a recommendation to be made to the Minister which seems absurd. There should be good reasons why the Commerce Commission would go to the Minister and make a recommendation that he or she should control the terminal gate price. I think that is something that no doubt the select committee will be looking at but to have no framework around that seems rather odd.The final point I'm going to say is I think this bill assumes that we've got a steady state fuel prices don't move and so you'll have a Minister one day say This is the terminal gate price for these airline fuels." or whatever it might be—diesel whatever—"This is the fuel price." Well actually the spot price out of Singapore or wherever it is—and you know there are many suppliers of fuel around the world—changes not only daily but almost by minute. So you could almost imagine that as soon as the Minister made a determination it'd be out of date within an hour. And so what do you do? You have a Minister's office running a website putting up every five minutes what the new price should be. That'd be a good job. That's another job for a bureaucrat I would imagine. I think the Minister who put this bill up hasn't taken that consideration into account and I think that's a fatal flaw in the approach to what's being suggested here. Anyway we will be opposing the bill."