Ardern JacindaJACINDA ARDERN (Deputy Leader—Labour): I want to take this opportunity while the Minister of Internal Affairs is in the chair to ask a few questions around an element of the bill that has essentially been left via the proposed Act between consultation between the Minister and those affected by the transitional levy. In particular I will be coming at these questions from the perspective of those who are in the museum or the gallery space who have made strong representations around elements of this legislation and for good reason. I am sure that there has been to a certain degree a shared view across this House around not wishing to unduly impact on those bodies but to a certain extent once this legislation is passed we lose the ability to have oversight over some of those elements of the legislation because it will be left to a consultation process.So I want to take this opportunity to ask some questions of the Minister because I know organisations have been asked around for instance who should qualify for transitional levy relief and what kind of formula should apply to them. The question I want to ask is: will there be a discretionary element to the formula that has been proposed for the transitional levy? If so will we use that opportunity to take into account whether the insured party is a public or private entity or rather whether or not those entities' sources of funding are public sources of funding? Will we be using that formula to differentiate between those entities that might for instance receive council or Government funding—because otherwise we may be creating a money-go-round of sorts in dealing with those organisations.The other question I have is whether or not the qualification for relief will be the very high threshold that has been set out in the consultation that has gone out because if so who are we actually intending would be covered by that given how high the threshold is?My next question is: if there is some discretion in the way that the formula will be applied would a publicly funded entity that may be captured by this levy be able to have the ability to catch up in its public funding in order to cover the cost of the levy? The reason I ask that is that if you take an organisation like for instance the Museum of Transport and Technology (MOTAT) its funding formula means that it might be hit with a levy before it is even able to make application for its public funding to catch up with the cost of that levy. Will that be built into the application—or the timing at least of the way that levy will apply to it? Better yet could we actually just factor in that it is a publicly funded organisation and apply the rules differently to it? A strong sense I get from those organisations that will be in a similar boat to MOTAT is whether or not we could focus on a by-agreement approach rather than a much more strict formulaic approach.I would also like to hear from the Minister whether or not he is considering the exemption of publicly funded buildings of national significance more generally or heritage buildings more generally as well. I know museum collections have been discussed.Those are some of the questions that I wanted to ask. We do already have transparency and I thank the Minister for that around levy rates for house and contents and car insurance but for commercial and public entities that are facing larger increases we still do not have enough certainty necessarily around them. I would really like to take this opportunity to put those questions to the Minister because I know he has approached this absolutely with good faith as have the organisations that have come before the select committee but they are in a period of flux at the moment. It would be good to use this opportunity.