Henare PeeniPEENI HENARE (Labour—Tāmaki Makaurau): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. In the vein of much of the contribution earlier this evening I would like to start with a theme. From the 1976 album A Night on the Train tonight is definitely the night. Tonight is the night when we debate this particular bill the Land Transport Amendment Bill. My colleague here Sue Moroney talked about Rod Stewart and how Rod Stewart" presented to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and really pointed out the flaws the discrepancies and the ease with which he was able to exploit this particular system. For the purposes of natural justice his particular case was shared with Uber and others who are involved in this particular space and none of them had an answer. None of them were able to rebuff the fact that this particular gentleman actually flouted the rules flouted the system and was able to get away with it.So sticking with the Rod Stewart theme—Hon Member: Oh really?PEENI HENARE: Well you know he is a great singer and is married to one of our locals so we might as well stick with it.Sue Moroney: Was.PEENI HENARE: Well he was—he was yes. I could give a bloody good quote of his—but anyway.I am glad to hear the member for Epsom mention how tonight the good people of Epsom will be able to sleep well this evening without fear of fare evaders storming through Epsom—running riot across Epsom. There is no ability in the old legislation to actually hold them accountable for evading fares so we support that particular part of the bill. What we did question during the select committee process was—OK we can allow for more police officers and other officers of the council to crack down on fare evasion but that only works if you actually resource them to do it. We certainly do not expect our upstanding policemen and policewomen across the country to be standing outside a train station waiting for anybody who happened to evade a fare of $4 and make sure that they throw the book at them and that the heavy hand of the law comes down on that person who for one reason or another—who knows—might have caught the train in South Auckland and had no money. We understand the poverty issues. But I digress. We support this particular part of the bill but wonder whether or not it comes with the resources to make sure that the legislation as described here in this bill is actually carried out.I also want to pick up the point made by Mr Young the chairman of the select committee about how he mentioned that some of the apps that are currently available for those who are vision impaired are able to talk to them—are able to talk to them—so there is not a need for Braille. When the submitters came to the select committee they made it very clear that a lot of that technology for those vision-impaired people is still very expensive—very very expensive. Many in the vision-impaired community were unable to afford many of those particular pieces of technology to allow them to be able to enjoy a passenger service in particular in Tāmaki-makau-rau in Auckland. Just to the point that the chairman of the select committee made it is all fair and well to say that the technology exists and is available there for them but the fact of the matter is that it is not available to all of them. That is why we will be supporting wholeheartedly the amendments that will be proposed by my colleague here Sue Moroney about the small compliance cost to make sure that there is Braille available on a taxi so that those who are vision impaired are able to actually understand that this is who this person is this is the service that they provide and should anything happen to them they will know who that person is.We heard I thought a quite harrowing story from one submitter who actually feared for their life as a vision-impaired person catching a taxi. They explained how they were taken to a place where they were not comfortable—the kind of conversation and the inability of the driver to explain exactly what was happening and where they were going left this particular submitter in fear for their life. So we will be supporting the amendment that will be proposed by Sue Moroney to ensure that that small compliance cost surely can be met to make sure that that community is looked after.There is also the other one—cameras being available in all taxis. The chairperson of the select committee talked about how technology is the now it is the future. We do know that with this technology and the market the way that it is cameras and such apparatus for a taxi are actually quite cheap and easy to install. It is important for the matter of the safety of drivers and passengers that this actually be a compliance that is required for all who are operating in this space. So we will be supporting the proposed amendment from Sue Moroney on that matter.The other ones are pretty straightforward. Of course we support the drink-driving interlocks right across the House and I take the point made by the member Julie Anne Genter. I think we actually made the bill better.Sue Moroney: We did.PEENI HENARE: We did. The select committee worked hard. There was rigorous debate. Those who came to explain the technology and the science of it—I think that through the debate in the select committee it was made better and stronger. We all agree that we want to take recidivist drink-drivers off the roads—drink-drivers full stop off the roads—to make sure that those who use our transport system are safe.To another point that I think my colleague Julie Anne Genter touched on and that is the sad fact that this Government looked at this particular bill as almost in a silo when really what we should have been considering when we looked at this bill was actually a broader look at our transport system in particular in Tāmaki-makau-rau. We need legislation that will force a change in the way we think about our transport network in Tāmaki-makau-rau. While this particular bill goes some way to doing that it is only a small part which is where I take the point made by Mr O'Rourke in saying that this bill is in some parts quite substandard.But the Labour Party will be supporting this bill in particular the amendment proposed by my colleague Sue Moroney that will come up no doubt in the next stage of this bill. That one of course is about cameras—about making it compulsory to have cameras in taxi services—and also about the relatively small compliance cost to make sure that Braille is available to the visually impaired community which relies on these services. Julie Anne Genter explained it quite well that they are quite vulnerable. In fact they are very vulnerable. They rely on a sound strong transport system that looks after their safety but also allows them to participate in our communities far and wide.Without going on for too much longer I just wanted to stand up in support of this bill. I would also point out some of the flaws that we encountered as this bill went through the select committee and I hope that in its next stage further debate will be able to take place and we will get the support needed across the House for the sensible and smart amendments that will be proposed by Sue Moroney. Certainly the Labour Party will support this bill."