Utikere TangiTANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North): Thank you Mr Chair. Minister can I thank you for that. I think you should just stay in the chair because we've spent nearly six or so hours asking just that one formatting question and it seems the only response that we needed is that it simply meant to say Table 2". Already you have provided a direct response in a much shorter time so I thank you and encourage you to remain there. Transport might be your new calling perhaps. But can I just pick up on the issue around—Tim van de Molen: Point of order. Thank you Mr Chair. Look I just wanted to pick up on the comment you made before the Minister spoke which if I heard correctly you were suggesting that you would require the Minister to address questions. Now that is a significant deviation if that's what you said sir from the current process where Ministers indeed are not specifically required—the Chair cannot require the Minister to answer questions. So I'm interested in whether you are making a new ruling to that effect or if I misheard.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): No you may have heard me say that of course there'll be an expectation that the Minister will address the questions and that remains the case. I'm sure the member having been on both sides of the House would certainly understand why there would be such an expectation. But thank you for helping me clarify that.TANGI UTIKERE: Thank you Mr Chair. I guess one of the questions that I do have for the Minister is how will she seek or how will the Government seek to maintain the ambition that is evident in the current targets—and we'll come to clause 7 later. How can that sense of ambition be maintained if effectively the Government is winding back the date upon which it would make it easier to water down what the threshold is for those targets and for those standards? The Minister has informed the committee that the Government is serious about work in this space but that doesn't really align with the ability to carte blanche with limited consultation—and we've heard previously from the Minister that in setting these regulations under his watch the only people that will be consulted are vehicle importers; that's it. Now vehicle importers clearly have an incentive when it comes to perhaps looking at what is the best cost options for themselves. That is very easily the case to be to the detriment of potentially the environment. So there's nothing in here as a stopgap measure in terms of the timing of this to suggest anything otherwise. So I am interested in hearing from the Minister a response around that.The other is previously sir we referred to the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment an Officer of this Parliament. The committee is extremely familiar with the contents of that letter now but it was suggested I think from the Minister in the chair that the concerns that had been identified in the commissioner's letter were more appropriately targeted towards clause 6 which we are at at the moment and it comes to timing. So my question there perhaps is from the Minister around a response to the suggested amendment from the commissioner. And in fairness to the Minister it may require a wee while to come back on a response to that because this was traversed in previous parts but it was also essentially signalled to be parked for latter clauses. It relates to the suggestion from the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment to make a minor amendment to the drafting of section 175A(a) so that it actually allows for the time frame to be set not later than 30 June 2025. So what this is currently suggesting is the date would kick in from 2024. What the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment is seeking is an amendment which I think is quite significant given that the commissioner has sought to make this particular view known. If this was at select committee the commissioner would have no doubt submitted and would have made this point known to members of the committee. There would have been advice received on that. So my question to the Minister is: what is the Government's view of the specific request from the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment to effectively have the date as not later than 30 June 2025 rather than sticking with what is currently proposed as a blanket year rule of 2024?"