I want to start with new section 167B(5), which talks about "the Minister must not recommend the making of regulations unless the Minister is satisfied—(a) that the fees and charges are appropriate to increase supply and availability … (b) that the imposition and level of charges … are appropriate [for] international and domestic climate change ambitions". And it does strike me, in a pragmatic sense, that that would be potentially one provision to look at where we can look at the inequity of people who need certain cars around, potentially, their occupations; and why we could not have in there "if the Minister was not satisfied that certain groups of people didn't have choice", because, as we know with this "ute tax", some New Zealanders are not going to have choice under this scheme.