Jones Dail: Public Transport Management Bill — In Committee 
Jones Dail: Public Transport Management Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:650;Page:18663] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 I think one of the answers to the integrated ticketing question is actually contained in Mr Williamson’s proposed new clause 12(6). It requires compensation if one is going to take away someone’s rights. That is what Mr Williamson’s proposed amendment provides; that is what the Public Transport Management Bill does not provide. 
New Zealand First members believe that if someone’s rights are diminished and taken away they are entitled to compensation. I say to Mr Williamson that that is the point is it not? I have read his amendment and I have understood it. Either the Minister for Transport Safety has not understood it or he does not believe in compensation. I think under the Human Rights Act and other such legislation compensation would have to be paid. So this bill is perfectly consistent with a good integrated ticketing system. As I said in the second reading debate I am familiar with the Oyster card system in the United Kingdom which is what is intended here and I look forward to it. 
I am terribly disappointed that the ACT party could possibly be supporting this Labour Party - Greens legislation. That is what the legislation is. Mr Hayes does not seem to understand who is supporting this bill; neither does Mr David Bennett who seemed to be talking about something else. This bill is opposed by the National Party and by New Zealand First. One of the reasons that I as the New Zealand First spokesperson on local government oppose this bill is that history shows us that local government taking over control of public transport means increased rates. That is what this bill will mean. If the bus system is making a loss the ratepayers will have to pay more to make up that deficit. 
I am absolutely staggered that someone like Mr Hide who purports to be in favour of reducing rates supports legislation that will increase the rates of the people of Epsom. It is quite unbelievable. Mr Williamson shakes his head and bangs his head; I will not do that as far as Mr Hide is concerned—I leave it to Mr Williamson. The bill must inevitably increase the rates of the people of Epsom because that is what happens when local government takes control of public transport. That is what happened in the past. Those of us who have lived in Auckland since the 1960s as I have done know all about it. 
When I read for the first time option C in the explanatory note of the introduction copy of the bill I could not believe that anyone could possibly support it because it says: “Prohibiting all commercial services in a region would reduce opportunities for public transport operators to innovate and would reduce the control operators have over their businesses thus potentially undermining business confidence. For these reasons option C is not preferred.” Clearly that was a well-thought-out viewpoint in the bill as introduced. I must congratulate the National Party member Pansy Wong on highlighting option C in that way. Central Auckland is better served by her than by Rodney Hide in so far as the inner-city members are concerned and clearly she has the interests of the people of Botany—is it Botany— 
Pansy Wong 
: Botany would do. 
DAIL JONES 
: —at heart because she does not want to see their rates going up either. Mr Hide is all in favour of Auckland rates going up and Epsom ratepayers’ rates going up. When we bear in mind the value of Epsom properties we realise that their rates will go up more than the rates anywhere else in Auckland City. 
The explanatory note comment that I referred to says that if we support option C we will reduce opportunities for public transport operators to innovate. Well why have a one-size-fits-all approach? That is what option C supports. New Zealand First supports innovation. The buses on these runs—especially the Epsom runs—could have computer links air conditioning music and suchlike; that innovation is possible but not with a one-size-fits-all approach which this bill supports and which ACT supports. Roger Douglas would never support this bill. I can already see a potential argument between him and other members in the ACT caucus on this decision. It is quite extraordinary. option C which New Zealand First and National oppose and everyone else supports would potentially undermine business confidence. The explanatory note says so. Some members in this Committee are supporting legislation that the explanatory note says will undermine business confidence. 
It goes on to say that option C will reduce the control that operators have over their businesses. A bill that Rodney Hide and the ACT party support will reduce the control that operators have over their businesses. Well New Zealand First is a middle-of-the-road party when it comes to economic issues and in a middle-of-the-road way we in New Zealand First say that operators should have control over their own businesses should know what they are doing and should be able to make their own decisions because private enterprise knows best how things should be done. However we appreciate that one cannot make a profit out of public transport even in Auckland and that there needs to be a mixture of public and private operators.