Gas (Information Disclosure and Penalties) Amendment Bill

Members, we return to the Gas (Information Disclosure and Penalties) Amendment Bill. When we last considered this bill, we were about to debate clauses 1 and 2.

I’m just going to take a short call on this one, and perhaps for the public who have been listening tonight just outline the fact that there were two parts to this bill, and the Government chose to close down Part 1 and then the Minister actually decided that nothing in Part 2 related to the things that the Minister didn’t want to answer in Part 1. So I was going to suggest a new name for this bill, and it’s called for the openness and transparency of the Government that we currently have—not—the “Gas (Information, Disclosures, and Penalties for Industry and Everyone, But Not Government) Amendment Bill”, because I think it’s appalling when we’re talking about disclosures in the name of the bill, and the Government actually shuts down the conversation.

The Minister, on several occasions tonight, when I mentioned a plan around energy security for this country—and the Minister may sit there and laugh, but—

CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! Order! This is about the title and commencement—

Yes, it is.

CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Absolutely. It’s very narrow. The member should address that.

Yes, it is. So I’m talking about information, disclosure and penalties around gas—

CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): It’s not about relitigating Part 1.

I’m not relitigating; I’m talking about the name and the fact that—

CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! My ruling is that you are and that you must address clauses 1 and 2. That’s your second warning. If there’s a third, I’ll terminate the speech.

So the only thing left that I want to propose is that a name change for the bill to the “Gas (Information Disclosures and Penalties for Industry, But Not Government) Amendment Bill”. Thank you.

That member Barbara Kuriger has proposed a wonderful, transparent improvement to the bill: the “Gas (Information Disclosure and Penalties for Industry, Not Everyone) Bill”. The ACT Party believes that that is a far more accurate representation of what this bill proposes to do, because the disclosure requirements are all on the industry and not on the Government to tell us what they might want to do with the information or how they might use it or if they can protect it if there is going to be a cyber-attack where commercially sensitive information is going to be released. Given how important it is that energy security is protected from cyber-attacks—I mean, imagine if there were an event like what happened at the Waikato District Health Board that befell our power grid.

So the “Gas (Information Disclosure and Penalties for Industry, Not Everyone) Bill”, ACT believes, is a totally appropriate, transparent, and sensible name for this bill. ACT would commend that to the House.