SpeechNEW ZEALAND INFRASTRUCTURE COMMISSION/TE WAIHANGA BILLSecond ReadingHon SHANE JONES (Minister for Infrastructure): I move That the New Zealand Infrastructure Commission/Te Waihanga Bill be now read a second time.First I want to acknowledge on behalf of my colleagues the efforts expended by the Finance and Expenditure Committee in bringing the bill back. I think this is a rare event where both—if not all sides of the House then certainly the National Party will join with us in ensuring that this bill passes expeditiously. I want to spend a wee bit of time just elaborating and reminding us what the purpose of this bill is and then I will identify the refinements that the select committee have served up to us. But as I said the leadership of the select committee went through a slight change during the course of the bill's evolution and I want to acknowledge both of those chairs given that I too in the past used to chair that illustrious most senior select committee in Te Whare Pāremata otherwise known as FEC.The bill enables us to create the commission which will provide independent expert advice on infrastructure so that we can effect better infrastructure outcomes and improve the wellbeing of New Zealanders. This actually follows on from at least 12 years where within Treasury obscurely located was an infrastructure committee. Gallons of ink were spilt and energy was spent and verbiage littered various parts of the Treasury environment but it was not until this Government was formed and a clear commitment was announced to move forward and actually establish an independent infrastructure commission. Of course the Leader of the Opposition claimed credit for it and said that he was going to—that's Mr Bridges—deliver on such an outcome. Well I've saved him that problem. I must acknowledge the efforts of the Hon Judith Collins who—actually it was the Leader of the House oddly enough who suggested that I create an opportunity to engage with the other side of the House. The Hon Judith Collins and the Hon David Bennett they came and met with me and indeed they had some sensible suggestions as to who should sit on this body. So it's not really a matter of gross partisanship.The challenges are substantial. Obviously its contested space as to how much additional money we should allocate to building roads and where those roads should be located. We currently have a small body of work underway as to whether there are more sophisticated ways to meet the fiscal costs of ramping up road construction but that really is in the area of the senior transport Minister and at the appropriate time no doubt he'll talk about that. We also have challenges which no doubt will be brought closer to home to local government leaders as the Hon David Parker's water policies are further consulted on—both capital-wise institutional and human capital—in terms of dealing with our Three Waters challenges. But for fear of ensnarling myself in a local government election and having to choose sides between John Tamihere and Phil Goff I see considerable virtues in both of them and downsides in both of them as well. Although I must say unfortunately for me it was Mr Goff who had to defend me in a colourful lapse of judgment several years ago but that's all in the past now.During the course of this bill's development we engaged extensively with the sector. We also took trips to Australia—I certainly took one trip to Australia—and although I feel slightly awkward saying it we did borrow from what they have achieved in relation to getting better infrastructure outcomes by having their own independent commission. What the sector told us and I'm sure they told the other side of the House this as well was that in the absence of integrated investment decisions across local and regional and central government we are selling ourselves short. There's a lack of visibility in terms of a long-term pipeline and the scale of the projects are not well understood. In my view a number of these projects should be built with a blend of private and public capital. A number also should be highlighted and signposted well into the future so that the civil construction sector—which sadly doesn't employ as many of my Māori whānau as it used to and it's progressively relying in some cases indeed certainly with Fletchers on an enthusiastic group of migrant workers not exclusively but largely from the Philippines. I belong to New Zealand First and I'd like to see my own nephs and indeed my Pasifika irāmutu—nephews and nieces—taking those jobs. Hopefully the existence of this entity will provide long-term planning and the ability of our institutions to serve up suitably qualified men and woman to actually deliver on infrastructure outcomes.There were a few testy areas with local government but given that we're central government and the sovereignty of Parliament trumps local government they in the end were brought to heel. Some of them unwisely thought that they shouldn't be required to provide information to the infrastructure commission—that was short-sighted and very parochial thinking. That problem's been dealt to. There were other concerns pertaining to the protection of commercial information and indeed the super fund the Cullen fund and ACC they did reflect some anxieties that where they are involved in infrastructure projects they wanted their commercial interests protected. They needed reminding that they actually belong to the Crown. Although the ambitions of their directors and their executives is to stray far from the Crown the genesis of those organisations is traced back to here. We hold the obligations of upholding the political sovereignty of the nation not those independent bodies. They are creatures of the Crown so naturally they will comply with the law. So if I just round up by reminding us that at the end of the day the infrastructure investment decisions that this board will provide advice on—higher quality of surveillance in terms of what's happening across the economy—it will always rest with Cabinet Ministers. I think that is important. A number of politicians in this House did approach me that are we not usurping the role of democratically elected politicians who end up being Ministers that they should have the privileges—I suppose—of putting into place their manifestos that they've been out and tested through the electoral process. So it's important that whilst this body has high quality credentialed people at the end of the day it's the politicians that will make the call.So we will be ably served by Dr Alan Bollard the chairperson. His name should need no further explication in this House although he did attract the attention of my leader the Rt Hon Winston Peters because apparently he was the treasurer or the Secretary of the Treasury. I tend to regard the Hon Grant Robertson as the treasurer but for some strange reason he's not called the treasurer. Jon Grayson an Australian he will be the chief executive—a high quality civil servant who earned his stripes over there in Australia. David Cochrane a well-known senior lawyer who was trained I am told by Walter Iles—a paragon in the history of parliamentary drafting and who drafted many a piece of legislation. I first came across him in the days of the David Lange Government where for a mercifully short period of time I worked for Geoffrey Palmer. Then Raveen Jaduram who is one of the best CEOs of Watercare. His name was promoted by a host of Aucklanders and some unfortunately for me sit on the other side of the House. Sarah Sinclair is the single person that was retained by the earlier committee. Stephen Selwood—although he has a reputation as being something like a canine creature that barks at every passing car—deserves to be there because he's been an advocate for better infrastructure outcomes for Aotearoa for a long period of time. We should work with people who may from time to time irk us but such is the mature responsibilities that lie upon my shoulders. The final person is Miss Sue Tindal a very experienced banker and someone that I'm confident will continue to enjoy the confidence of both sides of the House. I commend the bill to the House.