Duynhoven Harry: Public Transport Management Bill — In Committee 
Duynhoven Harry: Public Transport Management Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:650;Page:18663] 
Hon HARRY DUYNHOVEN (Minister for Transport Safety) 
: 
 I take a brief call to answer one or two of the points that have been brought up along the way. The previous speaker Pansy Wong—an Auckland member I understand—did not seem to realise that one of the reasons for making quite a change of emphasis in the Public Transport Management Bill was the major input of Auckland local government and the submissions that were made which clearly had an effect on the way the bill was thought of by the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and by members of Parliament who were prepared to listen to submitters. 
With regard to the comments the member made about the word “affordable” I say that if one looks at the report-back version of the bill one sees submitters raised the use of the affordability concept and it was added to the bill. Of course that aligns this legislation with the Land Transport Management Act which affordable public transport is a major part of. So I am very pleased that the point the member made has been taken care of. That is surely what the select committee process is supposed to be about: ensuring that improvements are made to bills. I say that in all the time I have served on select committees which is some 18 years that has been the purpose of having them. I say to Ms Wong that in my select committees and in any committee that I have had anything to do with the purpose was to improve the outcome. We actually need to take note of what is said in submissions. 
I want to address very quickly a couple of Mr Maurice Williamson’s amendments. If one looks at the ones that refer to the issue of integrated ticketing—if one looks at his new clause 12(3)(i)—one sees that any regional council if it specifies a control on commercial services in a regional public transport plan may also specify detailed controls in the plan. A control may “require the operator of any commercial public transport service to issue use and accept an integrated ticket specified in the regional public transport plan:”. So operators have to accept an integrated ticket. If one goes to subclause (6) one sees that “No control may be adopted under subsection (3)(d) to subsection 3(1)”. I then tell members to read paragraphs (a) and (b) of that subclause. I think if I was a commercial operator who was operating under a dual scheme like that I would be very much keener to take my own ticket for my own company rather than be part of an integrated ticketing scheme. 
I am very familiar with integrated ticketing schemes. In Europe they are very common; I have obviously used them when I have travelled to Europe. In Holland for example one can catch trains trams buses in some cases canal boats and even taxis all on the same integrated ticket—and it is a universal ticket used right across the country. I think that is an excellent scheme. Without having an integrated ticketing scheme that is paramount I think operators would obviously choose to have their own scheme. 
Just for the benefit of the previous speaker I say that she may like to do a bit of research and look into a company called Carrington buses which operated very briefly in New Plymouth. She may find that some of the things in this bill are actually very good provisions to have considering the history of that particular company.