Leary IngridINGRID LEARY (Labour—Taieri): There's a time to regulate and there's a time to leave the market alone and it depends on what the product is. Clearly the other side of the House see electricity as simply a consumer product that doesn't relate to life and death situations and to wellbeing. But for people like Folole Muliaga who died in 2007 when her power was cut off—she died two hours after her power was cut off because she was dependent on the oxygen supply that in turn was dependent on the power. That is not a fair situation and that is an example of why regulation is needed in this market. Yes there needs to be an efficient market and yes the market needs to be fair but there are consumers whose voices haven't been heard. There are consumers who feel the impact of pricing in a different way than other consumers do and that all needs to be tempered by a regulated market that ensures that all New Zealanders have access to the electricity that they need for life support or for medical reasons but also to be able to have meals on the table for children to be able to do homework and so on. So getting that balance right is a difficult task. What this bill seeks to do is strengthen the regulatory system so that those balancing decisions can be made in a fairer way so that the voices of consumers can be heard. We've heard about those who are dependent on electricity in their homes for critical medical support but the bill also seeks to strengthen the situations that we're seeing increasingly caused through climate change where there are natural disasters and emergencies where electricity might be required to stay on regardless of somebody's ability to be able to pay the bill there and then. Alongside strengthening the consumer voice it's also about clarifying the current ambiguity regarding the authority's regulatory powers and also adapting to technologies as we have heard.One of the issues that has been raised is around the Minister's ability to intervene should a good regulatory code not be forthcoming. That's entirely appropriate. There is the carrot of the industry being able to come up with a code that is suitable and appropriate and there is the stick of the Minister being able to determine in her wisdom that that is not serving consumers. So the industry has every reason to want to get that code right in order to avoid that type of intervention.Finally addressing what Simon Court said about the change of providers I wouldn't normally mention a provider but I'm sure that it is relevant here to be able to tautoko to Nau Mai Rā which is a social enterprise power provider that is the only kaupapa Māori provider in New Zealand. That was started by Ezra Hirawani who actually looked at power poverty which is what we have been discussing on this side of the House today and saw an opportunity to be able to take the surplus from power bills and redirect that into hardship grants for those who cannot afford electricity. So I imagine that Nau Mai Rā is one of the many providers that Kiwis will be changing to as they do make these choices around providing. But again many people change providers because they are actually solicited to do so by the power companies. That doesn't mean that they necessarily have the consumer voice that can feed into resolving the more complex issues about what pricing should be and how the sector should be running itself. So for those reasons I commend the bill to the House.