Mahuta NanaiaLAND TRANSPORT (WHEEL CLAMPING) AMENDMENT BILLSecond ReadingHon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister for Māori Development) on behalf of the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: I move That the Land Transport (Wheel Clamping) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. Our Government is committed to protecting consumers from predatory and unreasonable behaviour. We're strengthening consumer protections across a range of different areas and issues one of which is private parking enforcement. The Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs engages and listens to a range of people including people who have been unfairly clamped and intimidated as well as business owners who are frustrated with people parking where they shouldn't. It's therefore important that this bill strikes the right balance between those two interests. It does this by amending the Land Transport Act to set a maximum wheel-clamping fee of $100 that can be charged for a parking breach. It may seem unusual that the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs is responsible for this bill which amends transport legislation. However problems related to wheel clamping are a consumer issue and I'm certainly pleased that something is being done about it. The bill does the following. It seeks a maximum cap that wheel-clamp operators can charge. This can be amended through regulations if necessary in the future. It requires a wheel-clamp operator to respond to a motorist and remove a clamp in a reasonable period and it makes it an offence to charge more than a maximum fee or to fail to remove a wheel clamp. We also plan to allow for infringement notices to be issued on the spot to enable efficient timely enforcement action. These will be enforced by police and the bill provides additional powers for police to carry out enforcement. The provisions of this bill are intended to apply to private operators who enforce parking on private property. It doesn't apply to any agencies that have the authority to enforce parking under transport legislation like councils or police. I'd like to thank members of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee and particularly the chair for their consideration and improvement to this bill. There was a thorough debate at the select committee. The committee received 25 written submissions from interested stakeholders and parties on the bill and I'd like to thank all of those who took the time to submit. The vast majority of submitters supported the bill but in saying that there were also suggestions for amendments. The key points from submitters were on the level of the fee cap and whether the bill should introduce some additional requirements such as that around signage. I note that some submitters really wanted to see some mandatory standards requiring signs to be displayed in car-parks and what these signs have to warn consumers about. These submitters may be disappointed that the bill doesn't include this. There are already regulation-making powers in our legislation which will allow this to happen without needing to amend the legislation so this could certainly be something that we look at in the future if required. In the meantime passing this bill will be a positive step forward towards ensuring that consumers are protected when they are confronted with wheel clamping. Of course the key thing which this bill does is to set a fee cap of $100 which can be amended in the regulations. I know that there was a lot of debate about this at the select committee both among committee members and submitters. Some submitters said that a fee cap should be lower—as low as $50—while the wheel-clamping companies that submitted said that it should be higher or that there shouldn't be a cap at all. So where could we go to from there? Some said it should be higher; others said that it should be lower. It seems like the $100 cap that was in the bill as introduced is probably the most balanced approach. It will provide enough of a deterrent to people who might otherwise park where they shouldn't while also ensuring that people don't get charged ridiculously high amounts when they've only been parking for a short time. It's worth noting that clamping often happens not where someone has left their car parked for four hours but in some cases where they have parked for only minutes before they've been clamped. A higher fee cap would be disproportionate and unreasonable in these cases. A potential consequence of having this fee cap is that it might force some operators to have to rethink their business models. This is not necessarily a bad thing. For example some of them may choose to use breach notices more often because this can be a cheaper method which doesn't have to involve any confronting situations. It may mean that operators and business owners will focus more on deterring people from parking by putting up clear and visible signage to avoid having to take enforcement action later. If the fee cap does drive some of the rogue operators currently charging extortionate rates out of the market well I'm sure we'd all agree that's not a terrible thing either. The committee has recommended some useful improvements which will ensure the workability of the bill. Some submitters said that the bill should specify a time frame for a wheel-clamp operator to respond to a motorist. As introduced the bill provided that an operator has to be reasonably available to respond to a request to remove a wheel clamp. An operator also has to remove the wheel clamp as soon as reasonably practicable after a fee is paid. I understand members of the committee were interested in how more clarity could be provided around what time frame might be considered reasonable here. It was something that the Minister was also interested in. The committee has recommended the inclusion of a new regulation-making power to set out criteria to take into account when considering whether a wheel-clamp operator has responded to a clamped motorist within a reasonable time frame. This power will enable the creation of regulations if necessary to provide guidance if there do happen to be disputes about what is reasonable. This is a great addition and it has the potential to provide more certainty to motorists wheel-clamp operators and the police who will be enforcing these requirements. The bill also clarifies that consumers can go to the disputes tribunal to seek remedies. Can I once again thank the committee for its careful consideration of the bill and for making these improvements. Strengthening protections where there are obvious problems for consumers is an important matter to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs hence the progression of this bill. There has been a clear problem when it comes to overzealous wheel-clamping and extortionate fees being charged to consumers to have their cars released. I trust that the changes in this bill will provide a fairer system of private parking enforcement. Ultimately parking enforcement needs to be carried out in a reasonable and responsible manner. The bill will strike the right balance I believe between protecting motorists while ensuring that businesses have the tools to prevent people from parking where they shouldn't. I commend the bill to the House.