Key John: Land Transport Management Bill — Second Reading 
Key John: Land Transport Management Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9331] 
JOHN KEY (National—Helensville) 
: 
 I would like to join with the Minister of Transport the Hon Paul Swain and the other members of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee in wishing the previous committee chairperson Helen Duncan the best for a rapid and successful recovery. 
I would also like to take a moment to thank the officials who worked with the select committee as we went through the bill. It was a long and arduous process and they served the committee well if I may say so in providing us with a great deal of information. 
This is a very sad day for the New Zealand Parliament—very sad indeed. We have a Minister who is trying to shepherd through the House the Land Transport Management Bill a bill that he paraded up and down the country telling people it would be a saviour for New Zealand roads and especially Auckland roads. This bill will do anything but put road building in the fast lane. Aucklanders are frustrated because for 4 years we have heard the rhetoric from the Minister of Transport that this Government will fix the problem. Then he tried to strong arm the Auckland mayors; he did not want them to speak out against his bill—at least not publicly. Then he took months and months for submissions—between photo shoots on any scrunty little corner he could find in the New Zealand countryside. Then lo and behold he did something we have not seen from a Minister for a very long time in this country: he went up and down the country and begged people to oppose his own bill! He said: “Write the strongest submissions you can against this load of”—I cannot say the word in this House but I think Michael Cullen once said it in the form of phonetics. The Minister told people to write the strongest submissions they can against it. Why did he do that? Because he knew that the bill was hopeless legislation. 
It was so hopeless that he even gave up on it before it had come back to the House for its second reading and he dispatched another group the joint officials group saying: “Away you go officials; see if you can tidy up another bill before this bill even comes back from the select committee.” We all know that up in Auckland the joint officials group is working on the “de-Greened bill”. This Land Transport Management Bill is quietly known as the “Green dream”. It is Jeanette Fitzsimon’s one success in this Parliament—the “Green dream”. I might add that this bill was introduced at the very time she introduced her own little adaptation on New Zealand’s transport crisis—the Road Traffic Reduction Bill which would have introduced the modern-day equivalent of carless days. That probably comes as no surprise when people look at the make-up of the Green representation on the select committee—namely Mike Ward a man who does not even drive a car. 
What does this Government know about transport? The only thing it knows about and does very well is giving out speeding tickets. Up and down the country there has been a 200 percent increase in the issuing of speeding tickets. But this Government does not know anything about fixing roads. It does not know anything about providing legislation to deliver more roads. The promise that this Minister once made that the Land Transport Management Bill would be the legislation that would allow highways to heaven is just la-la land stuff. What does this bill do? Does it attempt to tackle the three very important parts of road construction in this country? Does it tackle the consent process? No it does not and we will talk about that in a moment. Does it look at the structure of roading in Auckland or in New Zealand? No it does not. Does it look at providing serious alternatives to funding? No it does not. 
One might ask why structure would be important. Well consider this for just one moment. In Auckland alone bodies such as Auckland Regional Transport Network Ltd the Auckland Regional Council seven territorial local authorities Transit Transfund New Zealand and Infrastructure Auckland are working on transport all with different agendas and all working in different locations. [ 
Interruption 
] That is right; another piece the “de-Greened Bill” is working on that—I accept that. But that is what is happening. 
What has the Minister delivered with the Land Transport Management Bill? He has delivered living proof that coalition agreements matter more to this Government than fixing Auckland’s transport crisis. The Government wants to forget about the billion dollars of lost economic activity that takes place because Auckland’s roads are in crisis. It says: “Let us not worry about that. Let us worry about making sure that if it all turns to custard in 2005 and we need to bring the Greens back in they will be very happy with us. That is what we are worried about with this legislation.” It forgets about the employers who came to our select committee on their hands and knees and begged us to deliver legislation that would fix the crisis in Auckland. It forgets about the people who move to Auckland in their droves from external and internal immigration; every day there are 49 new residents in our fair City of Auckland bringing with them at least 25 cars. There is not a skerrick of hope of a solution in this bill—not a hope in Hades. 
There is a crisis in Auckland and the people of Auckland are worried. We have a motorway network that has been on the books since 1963 and needs fixing. It will cost a great deal of money. It could be $4 billion or $5 billion. Frankly in my opinion it could be north of $10 billion. It will be a huge amount of money. If the Land Transport Management Bill had been written in the right way it could have provided a great opportunity to leverage that funding. It does not do that at all. 
I make this prediction: just like the emperor with no clothes Paul Swain will go down in New Zealand’s living history as the Minister with no roads. It will be a sad conversation around the dinner table when Paul Swain goes home and his wife says: “Honey how were those 3 years that you were Minister of Transport?”. He will look across with a long face and say: “Well it is no surprise we got thrashed in the 2005 election by the great new National Government. No wonder that was the case because I will always be remembered as the Minister with no roads.” What an indictment on 3 years of performance! He is a Minister who showed such great promise earlier on when he was out there petitioning against his own bill. The things he was saying against his own bill were absolutely right. He knew they were right but he was in caught in the haze of Green that descended upon his office. That is right; in between Morris dancers Jeanette Fitzsimons came up with this bill and stuck it on his desk and he followed it. 
Mr Assistant Speaker may think I am just a National MP making a few comments— 
Darren Hughes 
: He would be right. 
JOHN KEY 
: That is true. I would encourage him to do a little research and listen to what business has said about this wonderful legislation. The Employers and Manufacturers Association said the bill is hopeless Business New Zealand called it a red light for road users the Auckland City Council said it is only half the toolbox the Automobile Association said the overall effect will be bad news for the majority of New Zealanders and the Road Transport Forum said a disgraceful Government is “putting through Parliament legislation deliberately designed to increase the extent to which they can fleece road users and waste more money simply to buy the support of the Greens”. What a sad situation! 
As time is on the decline I want to make some specific references to the public-private partnership provision contained in the bill. In particular I say to the Minister what a wasted opportunity this has been. Worldwide the evidence is hugely compelling of countries that have adopted correctly drafted legislation of this kind and have crafted a solution for their nations: Australia the United Kingdom Ireland Germany France Switzerland have all used public-private partnership legislation. We know from a report I happen to have in my hand from Standard and Poor’s that everything contained in the Land Transport Management Bill is the opposite of what those people are telling us. I have gone through this document late into the night to see exactly what the report is saying. It is saying we should not provide prescriptive legislation we should not have a time frame of 35 years we should not provide a free alternative and we should allow existing routes to be tolled because then we would have some surety and would get high-quality investors putting up real private sector capital and providing a solution. 
This bill fails. It is a tragedy for the people of Auckland; it is a tragedy for the people of New Zealand. There is only one winner—Jeanette Fitzsimons and the Green Party.