Baldock Larry: Land Transport Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Baldock Larry: Land Transport Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21365] 
LARRY BALDOCK (United Future) 
: 
 Thank you Madam Chairperson for giving me the chance to raise another matter about Part 2. It relates to clause 15 and the issue of work time and logbooks. I was approached by a very nice couple in Tauranga—I am sorry to raise matters relating to Tauranga all the time but somebody in this Chamber has to raise the concerns of the good people of Tauranga. That nice couple operate a dial-a-driver business as a part-time operation. The husband works full time and the wife works part time because they see their priority as making a living that is sufficient to enable them to raise their family. They want the mother to be able to stay home in the afternoons so that she is there when the children come home from school and I think that that is laudable. They are concerned that this legislation will affect their business. I appreciate the discussion I have been able to have with the Minister and the officials to see whether the situation could be resolved but they have informed me that it is not possible in this legislation to find a way to exempt that couple. I have been informed that there is some hope because this legislation will not take effect for a year. There will be another process of submissions before the rules come into force so we may be able to find a way forward for the couple in that time. 
In this debate I simply want to put on record what the couple’s concern is so that we will remember that we need to work through this issue in the year ahead. The couple work as I said but they come home in the evening. The husband goes to bed. It is probably best for me to read from his submission to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee so that the issue will be nice and clear for everybody. The husband wrote that he arrives home shortly after 5 o’clock eats his dinner and then goes to bed for approximately 4 to 5 hours of rest. He is then ready for when at around 10.30 the couple start to get calls from people who wish to be driven home because they have had a little too much to drink. Since the overarching concern of this bill is safety I think it is important that we keep services like that operating so that people can find a way to get home if they have had too much to drink. So at around 10.30 the phone may go and the couple may begin to respond to some calls. They do not take calls after midnight during the week but on Saturday night—their busiest night—they go through until 3 in the morning. They are taking care not to overwork and make themselves too tired. They do not drive long distances when they pick people up and drive them home. They believe that they are operating in a very safe manner. 
The problem is that the legislation in establishing the 13-hour period in which a person can continue to work will affect them. It will not take into account the fact that although the husband works during the day he comes home and has several hours of very good sleep is probably as alert as anybody else and can provide the service. He wrote: “We understand the concerns regarding driver fatigue and accidents that are related to this but feel that dial-a-driver services in smaller centres do not pose a threat to our clients in this regard.” I agree with him. Just how many accidents can be attributed to safe drivers who are getting drunk clients home? There is no evidence that there is a problem. I think that someone who has worked driving for 13 hours will be far more tired than that gentleman who has worked an 8-hour day gone home had a sleep and then gone out to work again for a few hours in the night accompanied by his wife and sometimes apparently by the children who the couple say enjoy being involved as a family in the business. I think we should applaud a family that is committed to working together like that in order to provide an income so that they can meet their needs. 
The husband wrote: “It seems ridiculous to me that a man can drive a truck for 11 hours out of 13 in a day and then go out and drive as many hours as he likes in his private vehicle and there isn’t a law against that.” His comment makes pretty good sense really. He also makes the point that it is not fair to judge all people as needing the same amount of sleep each night. He wrote that many people exist quite happily on only 5 to 6 hours of sleep in a 24-hour period and I am sure that all members in this Chamber would have to agree with him. The husband wrote: “Both myself and my wife are people who do not need 8 hours every night and manage very well on the regime that we have put in place. We do not drive great distances here in Tauranga. Probably the furthest area we have transported clients home to is Te Puke which is only 26 kilometres from central Tauranga. Our driving is start-stop stuff along streets we have got to know very well and we are always careful to keep to the speed limits and take no risks.” 
I want to put on the record of Parliament that there is something that has not been resolved through this legislation. I support the legislation for trying to improve safety but we do not want to exclude the small dial-a-driver businesses which I believe exist not only in Tauranga but in other areas from operating. It is in the best interests of the safety of all of us that people who have been drinking can find a way to get home. Sometimes taxi companies will provide that service but when taxis are very busy they prefer to take one person home and not to tie up two drivers.