Curran ClareCLARE CURRAN (Labour—Dunedin South): It is a relief actually to be speaking in the third reading on this bill. It is not often that the Opposition gets up and is perhaps more effusive than the Government in speaking on a Government bill and it is not often that the Opposition gets up and says that it is proud of a bill. Occasionally we get a member's bill through and that is definitely an occasion to be proud of but it is rare that a Government-introduced bill has such strong support.There are two reasons for this with the first being that a large part of this bill was actually Labour's policy in 2014. I will just read to you what our policy said—and remember this is 2014—Currently between 20 and 40 percent of UFB installations require consent for right of ways and for multi-unit dwellings and we understand that there are legal impediments for householders in right of ways to access fibre. We support finding solutions to these issues so they do not unnecessarily impede the ability to roll-out of fibre while respecting the property rights of owners. We believe that there have been unnecessary delays in resolving this issue and will work with the industry as a matter of urgency to do so."Well guess what? It is 3 years later and we are only now getting through a piece of legislation to deal with that quite important issue—and the Government has only just got round to sorting it out. We know from the submissions before the select committee that for some providers at least 17 percent of connections for people who wanted to get connected to ultra-fast broadband (UFB) were being held up by these impediments. One provider told us that 60 percent of their work was being held up as a result. We also know that the cost to industry of not doing those connections was at least—and has been at least—$40 million of business that could not be done because people were being held up by being unable to get consent processes through and just giving up in many cases and just sticking with the poorer connectivity that they had.We also know of hundreds and thousands of frustrated and angry constituents who could not get access to this new infrastructure because of the impediments in law. That is one reason why getting this legislation through today is actually very important. The second reason is the part of the bill that was introduced at the select committee stage to allow fibre to be deployed across electricity poles and through private land in rural New Zealand. This is a revolutionary part of the bill. It opens up important economic opportunity to rural New Zealand and actually overtakes the existing Government policy. It came about because of the good work of the select committee as the result of the push from the industry—and here I want to acknowledge Northpower the electricity lines company that has been a provider of UFB within part of its footprint. It was its vision and its tenacity that pushed this through the select committee. I do want to acknowledge the work of the Commerce Committee chaired by Melissa Lee and the work of officials on this bill. The select committee worked extremely hard and productively and constructively to get this legislation through. As a result rural New Zealand now has an opportunity to get fibre out into places that it would not have got into much sooner than with the Government's existing policy whether for ultra-fast broadband or for rural broadband. It is an unusual example of a select committee producing legislation that is substantially better than the policy of the existing Government. We not only support this bill; we were a key driver along with other Opposition parties in getting it through select committee and we want it passed because there are too many obstacles in the way of many New Zealanders getting access to fibre.The sticking point in getting this proposal to the select committee had been whether or not Federated Farmers supported it and I think we should acknowledge that—that is why the Minister did not allow it to come in the original bill. Federated Farmers did acknowledge when it came before the select committee that there was a digital divide that it was a major concern and that Northpower's proposal would help but it wanted compensation for access to its land and for the poles and lines across its land. The Minister and the ministry had been frightened off by this—by its initial opposition—but they could have done this work behind the scenes before it came to select committee. Instead it was left to the committee which it did.A good compromise was reached and it meant that the private landowners were able to get a connection as part of the deal of the fibre going across their land. It really came down to a matter of how many metres that free connection could be strung out. We came to the compromise position of 200 metres for a free connection and for anything beyond that up to 500 metres it would be a fifty-fifty charge. That was a good compromise. Ultimately it was the result of hard work and good negotiations that came out of the select committee. As I said I am acknowledging Northpower because it did a lot of the work to push it through. I think it is really important that we acknowledge that.The digital divide in New Zealand is real. It is significant and that is why this bill is so important. It is not just about the 100000 schoolchildren who do not have access to the internet at home and the 300000 New Zealanders who have never used the internet. It is about places that are more remote in New Zealand outside the urban footprints that simply are on dial-up speed or only just above that yet having $300 million spent by the Government in its rural broadband initiative—which I consider to be a poor cousin to the UFB—their speeds have barely improved.In Wairoa for instance 49 percent of the population has no internet connection. In Huntly just 44 percent of households have internet access 51 percent in Tuakau 51 percent in Taumarunui. In Kawerau the main schools have complained that very few of their students have the internet at home due to cost and access issues. We have heard nightmare stories from people about their inability to even get their EFTPOS machines working in parts of New Zealand. These are not the most remote parts of New Zealand; these are parts of New Zealand that should be able to be doing better than this right now.That is why this bill is so important: it provides an economic opportunity. With the Government's two announcements I heard the Minister say that the UFB will improve things. Well for 130000 people in New Zealand it will not improve things until as late as 2024. That is 7 years away; 130000 people will not benefit from the ultra-fast broadband scheme until 2024. That is light years away in terms of internet access. Imagine what impact that will have on all of those children who are going to school during that time and all of the people who are trying to develop business opportunities during that time. What this bill does despite the Government's actual policy is it provides an economic opportunity for lines companies whether they choose to do it themselves or engage with a third party to open up rural broadband backhaul and actual access to the rest of New Zealand who are the poor cousins who are the second cousins who have been disadvantaged and are likely to be disadvantaged for potentially up to another decade. We commend this bill. We supported this bill. In fact we helped write part of this bill."