Fenton Darien: Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Fenton Darien: Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:658;Page:6958] 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to take a call in the second reading debate of the Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill. As we said in the first reading Labour supports all measures to help combat the problem of illegal street racing but I remain unsure whether this bill and the companion bill that we will be debating later tonight the Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill will be any more successful than current laws. 
Having said that I pay tribute to the submitters. We heard submissions in Christchurch Auckland and Wellington. There are some very very genuine concerns about illegal street racing. It is a nuisance to people who live in those areas and so on. I commend the Automobile Association for its very thought-provoking submission to the committee on this bill and the vehicle confiscation legislation. Its submission along with that of the Police Association was professional and well-researched and Parliament would be mad to ignore what these organisations are saying. 
As I noted in the first reading debate I believe that many of the actions permitted under this bill can already be undertaken within the existing legislation particularly Labour’s Land Transport (Unauthorised Street and Drag Racing) Amendment Act 2003 but there are some useful provisions in the bill such as changes in terms of breaches of the graduated driver licensing system. 
Labour believes that demerit points are a far more effective deterrent than fines. I note with interest the Automobile Association’s recent report called  
Saving Ourselves 
. I commend the reading of that report to all members of the House if they have not done so already. It calls for a change from the current crime and punishment model of enforcing transport rules to an injury prevention model. I think that proposal needs some serious consideration. The Transport and Industrial Relations Committee heard that fines have become a badge of honour for some illegal street racers and that the racers have no intention of ever paying those fines. All they do is clog up the court system and we all know the consequences of that. 
Unfortunately it will take a lot more than passing a few new laws to deal with the scourge of street racing and other illegal transport activities by young and not-so-young drivers in our country. I urge the Government to think innovatively about our approach to transport law enforcement. I hope the Minister of Transport will take the opportunity to take a wider look at road safety and enforcement during the current consultation on the road safety strategy Safer Journeys which he mentioned in his second reading speech. It is very easy to press the buttons and talk up car crushing and bigger penalties. Anyone can do that. I fear that this bill and the bill that we will be debating later tonight are an unfortunate hoax perpetrated on the New Zealand public whereby National is trying to be seen to be doing something when in fact this bill and its companion bill will not do much at all. 
The Government says that this bill is about protecting New Zealanders and keeping them safe from harm. The Government says that it is seeking to address road safety in New Zealand. Well I have to say that while we are debating these two bills there is a more urgent transport issue that we need to be dealing with. Right now in Auckland nearly a thousand bus drivers are locked out with 80000 passengers affected. That is a transport compliance and transport safety issue; whether or not the Government wants to own up to it that is a fact. Drivers have been locked out because they said they would work to rule. Let us talk about what work-to-rule means in their case. First it means that the drivers will not drive any bus that is without a working radio-telephone. What is so terrible about that? They will not drive any bus that is without a current certificate of fitness or a current road user certificate. I ask whether anyone would want to go on a bus without one of those. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: What’s this got to do with the bill? 
DARIEN FENTON 
: I say with all due respect to the member that it is a transport safety issue. The drivers will not drive any bus that has a safety defect that the driver is aware of. Unbelievable! Drivers also will carry out full pre-shift bus checks as described in the defect card supplied with each bus. They will spend 5 minutes at the end of every timetabled trip carrying out full terminal duties including lost property checks using toilet facilities if required by the driver or the service person operator performing stretching exercises and preparing the bus for the return journey. And they will keep to all lawful speed limits. I want the New Zealand public to know that when we talk about transport safety and Auckland bus drivers we are talking about a transport safety issue. These workers are following the rule book. I do not want to go on any bus without a current warrant of fitness or safety certificate. 
The Government keeps telling us that the role of transport legislation is to keep citizens safe from harm. So I ask why the Government thinks it is OK for Auckland bus drivers to be locked out because they are working to the rule book. In other words they are working safely. They are keeping their passengers safe and they are keeping other drivers and pedestrians safe as well. Transport safety is more than coming up with a couple of laws that might scare a couple of illegal street racers. It is about ensuring that drivers pedestrians and everybody else on the road are safe. Unfortunately it has become an industrial issue in Auckland. In my view no worker should have to work to rule. What is obvious is that the expectation— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: I draw the member’s attention to Speaker’s ruling 106/2: “On the second reading of a bill discussion must be confined to the bill before the House as printed.” If the member is making analogies she needs to draw them precisely into the bill. The second reading is really about a response to the work that the select committee did. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: Speaking to the point of order— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: No the member is not speaking on the ruling; I have ruled. The member will continue her speech. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: I am making an analogy in relation to transport safety. The Minister said in his second reading speech that this bill was about transport safety and that he would be looking at safer journeys. I am making an analogy and although I am aware that some progress is being made with the help of facilitation I want to know what the Minister will do about safety for bus drivers and the safety issues that the bus dispute has exposed. I am aware that we are dealing with legislation but there are more important things to be dealing with right now and forgive me I do not think it is outside the Standing Orders to draw those comparisons. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: It is. The member should speak on the bill. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: The Minister of Transport has been promising his friends in Auckland from NZ Bus and Infratil that he will not only deal with this legislation but also repeal another Act called the Public Transport Management Act that was brought in last year that gives the Auckland Regional Transport Authority and others more control over routes and conditions such as those that NZ Bus currently services. What is so dreadful about that? 
If the Minister of Transport is trumpeting this bill as a means of protecting citizens from harm because that is what he is saying it is why does he think that enabling contractors to hide their books from Auckland ratepayers is OK? I think that is a fair question to ask and I will certainly be asking it in the Committee stage. 
This bill by and large will not address the concerns of the submitters who came before the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee with genuine concerns about illegal street racers. Once again I acknowledge those submitters because it was obvious from their submissions that they are living in some pretty terrible situations particularly in Christchurch. I am aware that the submitters will not be satisfied with this bill or the next bill to come before the House tonight. The legislation does not deal with the issues they raised. It does not deal with the issues around Nicky Wagner’s petition on noise. She went out and rarked up the issue in Christchurch and here we are. We cannot find a legislative solution to the problem; it is going to take a lot more than that. 
I predict there will have to be further changes. This bill and the companion bill will not deliver on the expectations this Government has raised around the issue of illegal street racers and others. For example there are some really interesting definitions in this bill like the definition of “cruising”. I think it will be up for a lot of future interpretation and it will be a money-spinner for lawyers. It is bad lawmaking. We need to get this right so that we are not providing endless opportunities for lawyers. Labour members are concerned about a number of things— 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: Cruising? Good grief! 
DARIEN FENTON 
: Yes honestly. We are concerned about a number of things which we will discuss in the Committee stage. 
Our judgment is that the bill is harmless although overall we think it is pretty useless. As I said at the commencement of my speech we support this bill but we will be interested to check in a year to see whether it has made any difference to the issue of illegal street racers. I predict that it will not have done so.