Leary IngridINGRID LEARY (Labour—Taieri): Madam Chair thank you for the opportunity—which is very welcome—to ask some incredibly important questions of the Associate Minister of Health the Hon Casey Costello and just to remind this committee that this is an urgency process and we've had a Minister who has not been very forthcoming to the fourth estate the media or I might say we are not satisfied with the answers given in question time. So it's really important that we get some good-faith responses to the questions that we're about to ask particularly in relation to the legislative process.So if I look at the section under the general policy statement and departmental disclosure statement and refer—I went to look on the House website to try and get a handle on the robustness of the process that has been gone through in order to inform this bill. I'd really like to hear answers from the Minister because when I look at the legislative disclosures there are questions in here which the Government are required to answer around publicly available inquiry review or evaluation reports that are informed or are relevant to the policy to be given effect"—the answer is no.The same applies to the regulatory impact statement. A regulatory impact statement was not prepared for the bill as this was part of the Government's 100-day plan. This is something that doesn't sit easy clearly with many members and so we'd like to understand the checks and balances of that given that this was not campaigned on. So where exactly does the mandate come from that the Government is saying that it has? To say that it's just from the general election is not satisfactory when there are no checks and balances and where there has not been transparency of the policy that is being implemented. "Extent of impact analysis available"—no. Any analysis like cost-benefit analysis—no—or "potential for any group of persons to suffer a substantial unavoidable loss of income or wealth?" No. And that's a really interesting point that I would like to understand because all the evidence would show that those who are affected by smoking-related illness many of them will suffer a huge loss of income or wealth that would be avoidable should they not have taken up smoking.The purpose of the original Act the one that is being repealed the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products (Smoked Tobacco) Amendment Act 2022 is to stop people taking up smoking in the first place. When we look at testing of legislative content the Treaty of Waitangi—we have a bit of a blurb about the urgent Waitangi Tribunal inquiry and yet we have the timing of this bill being introduced prior to the outcome of that. So that's another question that I would really like to hear from the Minister. We also have external consultation. And this one really gets me because the following agencies were consulted—there's a yes on that one and then there's a whole list of Government agencies including the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment; the Ministry of Education; the Ministry for Ethnic Communities the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade Customs Service; Police; Oranga Tamariki—that is what is purporting to be "external consultation". Well I would ask the Minister: what is her definition of "external consultation" given that we have 9000 doctors who were begging for this repeal not to happen and who wrote to the Prime Minister? Does her definition include Te Hā—Waitaha smokefree support; Oranga Hā—Tai Poutini: Stop Smoking West Coast; Quitline New Zealand; Quit Strong Te Whatu Ora; Smokefree; National Public Health Service; Action for Smokefree 2025; the fono students' groups? What about Te Hā Aukati Kaipaipa Stop Smoking Services? What about the iwi groups? Are they external? Do they fit into the Minister's definition? What about hapū groups? What about individuals?What about the chap that came up to me on a street corner in Taieri and absolutely begged me to get smoke-free laws that were workable and that would stop the next generation from smoking? Because he had been addicted all his life and he had spent vast amounts of money both on cigarettes and trying to quit and just couldn't.So these questions for the Minister speak to the type of process. We really do need answers because when I look at all the sections that say "No there is no paperwork." and then the two parts that say "yes"—one of them says "yes" to external consultation. I'm really struggling with the idea that going to Government agencies is considered external consultation. So I'd really like to know what the Minister's definition of "external" is and whether those other groups that I have referred to fit the definition."