Brown Peter: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Brown Peter: Injury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:609;Page:6645] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I was hoping that I could have my call before that member because I know that she is up with the play on this legislation—although she would not have given that impression with that speech. I would like her to tell me how the amount of 5.08c was arrived at. I can take an answer from her. Why the additional 0.08c? The average New Zealander could understand 5c 5.5c or 6c but why is it 5.08c? 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: We told you at the select committee. 
PETER BROWN 
: The Minister is trying to give the impression that this Government has its finger really on the button. That is far from the truth. We have just had the Minister of Justice answering a question for the Minister of Police. He does not know whether the Prostitution Reform Bill will make a greater demand on the police or a lesser demand. Yet the Minister for ACC knows that this increase is justified down to a fraction of a cent! I have not heard any detailed argument about how that amount was arrived at. 
The way that this bill has been handled and is being pushed through the House gives the strongest argument yet for privatising accident compensation. My view is that the Government should set its sights on getting the standard of coverage correct and on stipulating the entitlements that an accident victim is entitled to receive. It should not necessarily have the responsibility of insuring the motorist. The way that this is being handled is by having a blanket increase right across the board. There is no recognition at all of driving record type of car or whatever except to say that those who drive more and put more petrol in their cars will pay more—never mind whether they have a good safety record and never mind looking at this on a regional basis or a company basis. There is simply a blanket increase in the tax on fuel. We say there was an opportunity here to look at this with a little bit more innovation. 
Our second concern is that the motorist is already paying over the top with 18-plus cents per litre of petrol going into the consolidated account. If we ask any of the members over there why they say it goes there to be used for hospitals or for this or for that. We believe there was a good opportunity here to take 2.7c out of the contribution to the consolidated account and put it into accident compensation. The Government should have said it has slugged the motorists long and hard ever since it has been in Government and now it will use this opportunity to give them back a little bit. It should have said it would do the right thing and take out a portion of the levy that goes into the consolidated account. 
New Zealand First understands the reasoning. We do not accept the way this is being conducted. We do not accept at this point in time that there has to be an increase in the accident compensation levy and we do not accept that the petrol-using motorist should be slugged yet again. For those reasons New Zealand First is opposing this bill.