Bennett David: Land Transport Management Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Bennett David: Land Transport Management Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 01 July 2008. Volume:648;Page:17077. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 As we look back on this legislation I think we will see it in relation to the purchase of Toll NZ by this Government. The question from the ACT party today was pretty apt. It asked how such a deal could be so great in the Government’s eyes and in New Zealand First’s eyes when the purchase price some years ago was much less and the company was then rorted by the purchasers yet they now pay over $1 billion and say it is a good deal. What arithmetic is used by the Government and New Zealand First when it comes to purchasing? 
The reality is that the bill before us today the Land Transport Management Amendment Bill is a problem in the sense that it does not take into account what the regions actually wanted. The regions wanted the ability to distribute the regional petrol tax according to their needs. The Government did not give the regions the ability to do that; it imposed a mandatory split of 5c and 5c. The regions including Tauranga wanted the ability to distribute that tax of 10c per litre of their own accord. That is not what the Government handed to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. Region after region including the Bay of Plenty came and submitted that the Government should give that discretion. Would New Zealand First support the Bay of Plenty? No it did not. The Bay of Plenty wanted the ability to make that distribution according to its plans and not according to some mandatory distribution by the Government of 5c to public transport and 5c to roading. 
That is at the heart of the problem with this legislation. It does not take into account the roading needs of most of the regions of New Zealand. This legislation was set up because the Government had problems financing Auckland’s growth. It did not want to put the money in so it decided to charge the people of Auckland through a regional petrol tax. Then it decided that if it was going to charge the people of Auckland it might as well charge the people of New Zealand. That is the real reason for this bill. There was pressure on the Government to electrify the rail system in Auckland and there was pressure on the Government to provide some roading in Auckland. The Government would not stump up with the cash; it would say in its Budgets that it would build these things but it would not deliver any cash for them. Then it decided where it would get the cash: it decided it would have a regional petrol tax. This bill is the result. 
This legislation has been built around one region’s desire and does not take into account the desires of other regions around the country including the Bay of Plenty Waikato and Taranaki all of which wanted the ability to distribute the money as their regional plans dictated. That is the real crime in this legislation: it has been set up for one region then it has been extended across the country to give some kind of consistency but it does not provide the discretion needed for it to be effective. The regions wanted that discretion. They came in one after the other asking for that discretion. Did New Zealand First give them that discretion? No it did not. Did some of the other minor parties give them that discretion? No. Did the Labour Party give them that discretion? No. Those political parties stood against the wishes of the regions. The regions have been let down by this Parliament. Time after time they made submissions seeking that discretion and they have not received it. It is a shame on the Government of the day that it has not done that in this bill when it had the opportunity to do so.