7. Question No. 7—TransportHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) to the Minister of TransportQuestion No. 7—Transport7. Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) to the Minister of Transport: Did the Government re-scope transport projects it announced in January 2020 as part of the New Zealand Upgrade Programme in order to fund the $785 million Northern Pathway which includes the cycling and walking bridge?Hon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Transport): No.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Was any analysis undertaken comparing value for money of the Northern Pathway against Waka Kotahi's November 2020 option of a $2 billion crossing that included cars trucks walking and cycling and if so what was the outcome of that comparison?Hon MICHAEL WOOD: Yes consideration was given to a range of options including the one that the member identified in his question. I do note however that the indicative business case for the alternative Waitematā crossing proposes that the best and most likely option will be a tunnel something that the Opposition has previously supported as well something that would be inappropriate for a walking and cycling connection. As such it was determined that it was best to proceed with a stand-alone walking and cycling structure.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Is he comfortable that the benefits to Herne Bay and Takapuna walkers and cyclists is more important than avoiding further deaths on New Zealand's deadliest road from Te Puna to Ōmokoroa?Hon MICHAEL WOOD: I reject the premise of the member's question.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Does he agree with political commentator Josie Pagani who said It just seems to me no process. They haven't thought it through and it looks like they're looking after the Herne Bay/Takapuna lot not South Auckland."?Hon MICHAEL WOOD: I don't agree with that comment and as has been identified in this question time over $2.7 billion of transport investments are being made in South Auckland exactly the same as was indicated at the launch of the New Zealand upgrade package. I do need to say to that member that this Government does have a fundamental commitment to investing across a range of transport modes. This is no longer the 1950s. What I would also say is that along with that member I stood in this House and I voted for a climate emergency. I voted for the Climate Change Response Act and if I just mouthed those words and didn't do anything about it then I'd be a hypocrite and I'm not.SPEAKER: Order! No the member will resume his seat. I think the member went too far then. He will withdraw and apologise.Hon MICHAEL WOOD: I withdraw and apologise.Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order Mr Speaker. A member can't refer to another member as a hypocrite or say that someone has done something that is hypocritical. There's nothing to stop a member talking about themselves in that regard.SPEAKER: Well possibly unlike the Leader of the House I listened to the whole of the answer and any reasonable person who listened to the whole answer would've taken the same inference that I did.Hon Michael Woodhouse: In respect of climate change does he stand by his statement that the cycle bridge will be both a tourist attraction and reduce emissions and if so how does he plan to offset the emissions from international tourists flocking to New Zealand to use the bridge?Hon MICHAEL WOOD: In answer to the first part of the member's questions I do stand by that statement. I stand by another statement that was made by someone who has had a bit to do with these issues who said "If we look to the future it's not possible to just keep adding lanes to the motorway network. It becomes more expensive for less and less gain. We need to make better use of our existing networks and explore new opportunities to influence travel demand." The Hon Simon Bridges was right in 2018 and he's right now.Hon Julie Anne Genter: Can he confirm that the Ministry of Transport's green paper on reducing transport emissions states that "investments to expand urban state highways and major roads … leads to more people living in car-oriented suburbs which causes increasing car use and traffic emissions and higher travel times and costs." and how do those facts influence the rebalancing of the New Zealand Upgrade Programme?Hon MICHAEL WOOD: Well there were two key considerations for the Government in the rebalancing of the New Zealand Upgrade Programme. One was managing cost pressures and the other was responding to the urgent need to decarbonise our transport system. So in the rebalancing that we have announced today we do see a number of changes of investments which support a more decarbonised transport system. One which I would highlight is the shift in investment towards bringing rail between Whangārei and Port Marsden an investment that will get significant numbers of heavy vehicles off the road helping to decarbonise our transport network as well as bringing much greater resilience into our supply chain."