Copeland Gordon: Standing Orders—Suspension 
Copeland Gordon: Standing Orders—Suspension 
[Volume:630;Page:2195] 
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
: 
 I want to begin by saying for the record that 2 weeks ago on 14 March Dr Michael Cullen Leader of the House brought the Local Government Law Reform Bill to the Business Committee. He tabled with the Business Committee—and it was subsequently circulated with the minutes—a copy of the main provisions of the bill. In addition he advised the Business Committee in detail about a further part of the bill in relation to the Transport Act of 1962 that would enable local authorities particularly in the Auckland area to enforce bus-only lanes and to set and collect infringement fees etc. and that was recorded in the minutes of the Business Committee for 14 March exactly 2 weeks ago today. 
It is useful to put the facts on the table so that we can allow for once the facts to intrude on people’s preconceived notions. In contrast to the National Party United Future looks upon the bill as an opportunity to advance some things that are very very important to this nation and to its people. The first one of those is to build on the matter I have just mentioned—that is the bus-only lanes that have been set aside not only in cities within the Auckland area but also I think in other cities throughout New Zealand—to enable those to be enforced by way of by-laws to be able to set infringement fees for them and to collect those infringement fees etc. all of which will add to decongestion in the Auckland area and other places. 
I can tell the Minister of Local Government that a roughly similar issue has arisen in Paremata here in Wellington. State Highway 1 through the township of Paremata on the Mana Esplanade has also been widened to four lanes. It is a very unusual situation because the lane on the left-hand side going both ways works along the following lines: during peak time in the morning and peak time in the evening those lanes are reserved for use by vehicles with two or more passengers and are limited to those vehicles. However in non-peak time parking is permitted in those lanes. It is an innovative solution to try to decongest State Highway 1. We are talking here about State Highway 1 the main access to Wellington and its main connection to the rest of the country. So it is used by literally thousands of vehicles a day. 
The Porirua City Council has taken legal advice from both Chapman Tripp and Simpson Grierson and that advice suggests that it is not able to put in place by-laws to control those things—to have infringement notices and maybe infringement fees—without the risk of a High Court challenge under the existing law. So today Dr Roger Blakeley the Chief Executive Officer of Porirua City Council has written to me outlining the problem and asking that this matter should also be addressed by the Government as part of the Local Government Law Reform Bill. I have today forwarded that information on to Dr Michael Cullen as Leader of the House copied it to the Hon Mark Burton Minister of Local Government and asked the Government to action this opportunity. There will be an opportunity of course to ask the select committee to amend the bill to cover the Paremata situation. The other possibility which is probably just as good would be to introduce a Supplementary Order Paper covering the situation. 
I urge the Government not only on behalf of the people of Porirua and the whole Wellington area but also all the other New Zealanders who use State Highway 1 whenever they visit Wellington or try to leave it to take this opportunity to straighten that issue out as well. It is in tune with the bus-only situation in Auckland and it will decongest the situation out of Wellington. 
United Future is gaining a reputation as the party that will fix the decongestion issues on the northern access route from Wellington. Our recent actions in regard to Transmission Gully are well known. I think that when Transmission Gully is eventually built I will propose that it be called the “Peter Dunne Highway” because he has worked tirelessly on this issue for more than two decades unlike one or two others who have come to the issue in recent times and now want to claim credit for it and I will name no names in that regard. 
The second thing I draw to the attention of the House is the opportunity also for a Supplementary Order Paper in relation to the issue raised by John Carter—that is the microchipping of dogs. The Local Government Law Reform Bill will amongst other things be looking to amend the Dog Control Act of 1996. Because it will I hope as a result of this debate and the subsequent vote become an omnibus bill then it would be within the Standing Orders for this Parliament to address the issue of dog microchipping by way of a Supplementary Order Paper. I give notice today that I will be introducing a Supplementary Order Paper at the relevant time during the Committee stage of the bill to exempt farm dogs from microchipping. Jim Anderton had it right; they are a separate category of dogs by any reasonable analysis of the situation. I find the Government’s rhetoric on this matter entirely unsatisfactory. There is no reason why farmers should pay $100 per dog plus all of the other compliance costs to have their dogs microchipped. I thought the question today from Doug Woolerton of the New Zealand First Party about these dogs savaging the farmers’ stock absolutely ridiculous. There is an old saying that I would like to put to the member Mark Woolerton— 
Ron Mark 
: Doug Woolerton. 
GORDON COPELAND 
: I beg the member’s pardon. It was because Ron Mark was interjecting so strongly when I was trying to get my words out that I got the names muddled. 
 If one has a guard dog there is no real point in doing one’s own barking. Really whether a person has farm dogs is a decision that is quite within the competence of any farmer in this country. It is ridiculous for Doug Woolerton to come here and say: “I am wiser. They must microchip their dogs because they could attack their stock.” I think the farming community is quite capable of sorting that issue out themselves so I give notice to the House of my intention to introduce that Supplementary Order Paper and to test the will of the House. I ask the Maori Party in particular to give some thought to supporting the Supplementary Order Paper to exempt farm dogs from microchipping because if it does that and we can convince Doug Woolerton to see light on the subject then we might get the Supplementary Order Paper through this House. That would be good for the farmers of this country because it is just an expression of common sense. So with those remarks I signal that we will be supporting the introduction of this bill. I seek the leave of the House to table the letter from Dr Blakeley of the Porirua City Council on this matter which I received today. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.