Ross Jami-LeeJAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany): I always enjoy watching the faces of the Labour backbenchers as Phil Twyford is answering questions in the Parliament during question time because you can see the despair on their faces after his performances in the House. I think having now listened to him give that second reading speech members of the public watching will understand the concern that the Labour Party has around Phil Twyford. Never before have they seen someone so excited to come to the House to talk about taxing people more because that's effectively what this Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill is all about. It's about taxing people more—a tax that isn't necessary; a tax that isn't supported by Aucklanders; a tax that doesn't need to be in place because there was already a transport plan in place that was effective; a tax that will hurt low-income people the most; a tax that will hurt the very people that elected them on to the seats that they're sitting in right now. When we get to the end of this debate when there are more taxes in place—and it's going to be up to 25c a litre because that is actually what Phil Twyford has proposed; it's not just the $5 a week—it's 25c a litre on the people that are needing assistance the most with their cost of living. They're the people that will be hurt the most by this tax and they're the people that supposedly they represent.The biggest impact of this bill is to let the Labour Party Mayor of Auckland off the hook. The Labour Party Mayor of Auckland went to the public went to the polls and told people I will find 3 to 6 percent savings in the Auckland Council budget." Well he hasn't. He's failed and he's now being let off the hook by this Government.The reason why this tax is not necessary is because if the Auckland Council went and found the savings that Phil Goff said he'd find then this tax wouldn't be required because more than the amount that this tax would raise would be available in the Budget because of the savings that Phil Goff said he would go and find. Phil Goff hasn't found those savings; Phil Twyford is coming to the rescue with more taxes. The people in South Auckland that are struggling the most that have the most fuel-inefficient cars that won't get the benefits of any taxation put in place—those are the people that'll be paying and hurting the most because of this tax.The Auckland Council and Phil Twyford think this proposal has huge support. Well there was one poll back in February that did show marginal support for the proposal but ever since then—after the efforts of Phil Twyford up and down the country in this Parliament and after New Zealanders have become more aware of his plans for 25c-a-litre fuel tax increases across the country—public support has been dwindling to the point where when it came to submissions on this bill only about 10 percent of people were actually in favour of it.So there was a poll back in February—I'll give that to Phil Goff—saying there was support. A Colmar Brunton poll said there was 52 percent support. A Colmar Brunton poll in May though—the same company—now shows that 58 percent are opposed to the bill. But let's actually not just rely on political polls; let's go and ask the Auckland public what they think because Aucklanders submitted to the Auckland Council on the regional fuel tax proposal.A couple of months ago a majority of people who submitted were opposed to the Auckland Council's plans and Phil Twyford's plans for a regional fuel tax. Under the 10-year consultation more people were opposed to it than were in favour of it. Come again to the full consultation on the regional fuel tax—a majority were opposed and a minority were in favour of it. Come to the political polls come to the consultation undertaken on the bill—more and more people are opposed to these taxes that Phil Twyford wants to put in place and he's about the last man standing who is excited by these taxes.There's a fiction around these taxes that he's perpetrating in this House as well. It's not just $5 a week for people—that's turned into $150 million collected for the council—but he's gone and turned that $5 a week into $150 million which is supposedly going to be $1.5 billion over 10 years which supposedly will lead to $4.3 billion of investment which supposedly will lead to a $28 billion plan. Those numbers aren't real. That $4.3 billion isn't real because most of that $4.3 billion would have been there anyway. If Phil Goff went and found the savings that he said he would go and find then that $4.3 billion would be there anyway.Let's go to some of the comments from the people that represent those that are impacted the most by this tax. Those are the councillors—actually Labour Party councillors elected to the Auckland Council—who represent the poorest people in the city that will be paying this. Efeso Collins—he's a good man; he probably would've been supported by Willie Jackson sitting up the back there chirping away—says that whilst he understood the council wanted to progress transport issues when people were "below zero this is taking food off people's tables". This tax is taking food off people's tables. Daniel Newman who represents people in South Auckland said this is a "wholesale redistribution of wealth from some of our poorest blue collar workers who have the least transport choice to fund much of the infrastructure to serve those people who enjoy the greatest wealth." He said it wasn't fair and he didn't vote for it.If the Labour Party were true to their values and cared about people who are hurting the most in this country they wouldn't be putting more taxes on them. Are they going to be seeing more assistance? Are they going to be seeing more public transport? Are they going to be seeing more help from a transport perspective? No they're not. No they're not. This tax isn't required. There was already a plan in place that Phil Goff had signed up to with Simon Bridges and that plan would've also led to improvements without the need for more taxation.Phil Twyford gets excited about taxing people more but I think what he's excited about most are some of the regulation-making powers he's put into this bill. Phil Twyford stands up in the Parliament Phil Twyford goes on the news and says "It's only 10c a litre it's only 10c a litre."—of course add on top of that the additional tax which leads to 25c a litre that he's proposed. He's given himself the power through regulation in this bill to increase it at any point that he wants.It is not a 10c-a-litre tax; it's a legislative power that this Parliament will be passing—if it gets the votes from the coalition partners—to give Phil Twyford as Minister of Transport the ability to increase regional fuel taxes as high as he wants. We asked him about it in the Parliament. We said "OK so you've said to people it will be 10c a litre. Why give yourself that power?" and he skirted around the issue. Then we said "OK. Well if it's only going to be 10c a litre why don't we take this out of the bill?" No no—Phil Twyford doesn't want to take regulation-making powers out of the bill that will give him as Minister the power to increase regional fuel taxes as much as he wants.He also went to the country and said "It's only going to be Auckland—it's only going to be Auckland. It's only required in Auckland." Well we've got councils lining up up and down the country saying they want regional fuel taxes too and this bill actually gives the Minister through the parliamentary legislative process the ability to put regional fuel taxes elsewhere in the country. People in Tauranga that Clayton Mitchell purports to represent will be paying a regional fuel tax if that council gets its way and Phil Twyford signs up. The Wellington mayor is saying he wants a regional fuel tax—to fund light rail most probably which has an appalling benefit-cost ratio that Phil Twyford doesn't seem to care about. These regional fuel taxes will be around the country because Phil Twyford is giving himself the power.Let's go to price spreading. Price spreading is another issue with this bill. Phil Twyford was told by his ministry officials that price spreading would take place. It has taken place before and we'll see fuel prices going up around the country as a result of a regional fuel tax in Auckland. Well what are we seeing? We're seeing fuel companies in anticipation of a regional fuel tax increasing prices around the country. What's the biggest reason why prices are ramping up in Southland and not so much in Auckland? It's because of the Auckland regional fuel tax. The fuel companies are doing exactly what the ministry said they'd be doing but they're giving themselves that ability in anticipation of a regional fuel tax. I think that's appalling as well.Let's go to the consultation that the Auckland Council had in place and did before the bill was passed. Firstly it's pretty unusual to see consultation take place before a bill's even passed but in this case the Ministers even had to write into the bill a bit of a "get out of jail" clause because the Auckland Council got its consultation wrong and didn't follow the bill in the first place. This bill is about taxing Aucklanders more in a way that is unnecessary a way that is regressive a way that will hurt those lowest-income people the most in the city—the people that probably won't get much benefit from it. It lets the Auckland Council off the hook. It says to the Auckland mayor that he doesn't need to find the savings that he said he would and it also leads to a situation where Aucklanders are paying more at the fuel pump—up to 25c a litre—when it simply isn't desirable and isn't required and this will hurt people in the pocket. The Labour Government no longer cares about those low-income people that will be paying more tax. The Labour Government is ramping up taxes on Aucklanders and they won't be forgiven for it."