Lee MelissaMELISSA LEE (National): Thank you very much Mr Speaker. I would start off by saying that the only monopoly that is actually taking over in this debate is the Government thinking that it knows best. That seems to be the line that this Government is continuing on and I think people are waking up to that. I mean as soon as it became Government it talked of declaring a climate emergency and they espoused a low-carbon economy and yet what kind of result do we actually have? Since Labour took office going back to even 2017 we have multimillion tonnes of bad and dirty coal being imported from Indonesia because we cannot generate our own. The whole thing is that they say Oh it's because we cannot control rain." That is not the only reason; it is bad management. It is unbelievable and it is actually decimating the gas exploration industry killing off the Taranaki industry—I feel terribly sorry for the MP who is currently the sitting MP there.So we absolutely oppose this bill. As my colleague Stuart Smith has carefully laid out during the committee stage yesterday we were rather appalled that the Minister could not answer a lot of the questions that we were posing and often dismissed it by being sarcastic and even nasty in her commentary. I did actually give her some advice that perhaps she should be more collegial and then perhaps the committee stage would actually work better and work properly as it is supposed to so that members asking questions will get answers—and that is the objective. But there were no answers forthcoming. For example one of the things the members have talked about was the establishment of the small electricity consumer agency. We asked what the purpose was as we already have a very well-funded Commerce Commission who are in the business of acting for consumers. One of the things that I actually asked—I quote from my Hansard—and I quoted from the legislation where it says in new section 22A(4) in clause 11 "In approving a person or persons under subsection (2) the Minister must be satisfied that the person has (or the persons collectively have) the ability to perform the function of the agency." and that's a quote. That suggests that the Minister will appoint that person and what is the criteria that that person must have? Does the Minister actually deem that that person or those persons are better qualified or better equipped than the Commerce Commission to act in this capacity in this new entity that the Minister wants to establish? The only thing that she said was that the Commerce Commission doesn't do advocacy. Stuart Smith: Yeah that's what she said. MELISSA LEE: Mask! I'm translating it for you Mr Speaker. One of the things that she said was that it doesn't do advocacy so does that mean that this new entity is an advocacy group effectively—like a union?Penny Simmonds: It's Government-mandated.MELISSA LEE: A Government-mandated union effectively. You know I thought it was to protect the consumer so that we're aiming to reduce the high electricity prices that consumers are paying and this is just an organisation or group of people that's going to be the mouthpiece for the Government. It's typical of this Government to actually create new bureaucracy to do so.The Government has been told by numerous agencies—and Stuart Smith my colleague has said that the Ministry for Business Innovation and Employment the leading Government officials who are actually advising on this have effectively advised the Minister not to go ahead with this and yet the Minister has decided to ignore that. That is often the case with this Government—the Government and the Minister seem to know best—and I was so frustrated that I even asked her if her PhD was in this field. I don't think so but if it was then I would have said that actually maybe she knows best. But I don't think her PhD is in this field. I would have thought that if one does not actually have the expertise in this field one should take advice from officials whose job is to actually advise the Minister and who do in fact have the expertise and yet the Minister would not actually take advice.This is typical as I said. This is the Government and the Minister—it's an overreach. It's actually a power-grab so that they can control the narrative and control—Penny Simmonds: Another power-grab.MELISSA LEE: Another power-grab and the bit that I was completely skittled by was this particular bit in new section 44B where "The Minister may amend the Code under this section as if the Minister were the Authority". I mean I won't read the rest of it but literally the Minister can actually act like the authority and actually decide to change the code willy-nilly if she wanted. I thought there was a differential between Government entities the Minister and the advisers. I thought that was a role specific—Penny Simmonds: There used to be.MELISSA LEE: There used to be but not any more it seems. The Government and the Minister can actually take on the role like the authority and just change the regulation—just like that. This to me seems outrageous—that the Minister will actually take that power to do so.When Stuart Smith talked about the ever-increasing prices that everyone is actually facing one of the pieces of advice that the Minister would have got was that there are people in this country currently going through the cost of living crisis and those vulnerable people—particularly pensioners students and people who are on a low income—will be in energy hardship. They'll be making decisions making a very very difficult choice whether to eat or provide power to their homes to heat up their homes. This is a really really sad indictment on this Government when they make it more expensive for consumers. It's going to be tougher as we continue with this Government who see fit to spend more money with growing inflation and bad management. I certainly do not support this bill. I think it is a terrible bill and I do not commend the bill to the House."