Brown Simeon; Parker DavidSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Mr Chair and I appreciate your indulgence as I have my opportunity—CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): No you actually don't Mr Brown. We've been very even to date so we're going to talk about the bill.SIMEON BROWN: Yes I was going to talk about the bill too Mr Chair. So thank you.One of the questions I've got in relation to this bill is—and the Minister in his response to my colleague the Hon Paul Goldsmith said that the point-to-point cameras would only apply to high-risk roads—can the Minister of Transport please identify where in the bill it limits the criteria as to which roads average speed check cameras can be applied to? My read of the bill is that it does not include a limitation for these average speed checks to only high-risk roads. I'm happy to be proven incorrect. But I think there is concern from a large number of New Zealanders—who have seen the blanket speed limit reductions being imposed upon New Zealanders and new 30-kilometre-per-hour speed limits being put on vast swathes of suburban roads—that these speed checks will be used on those 30-kilometre-per-hour roads.The second question I've got is in relation to the clause which deals with traffic control devices informing drivers of the system. This clause is in relation to the requirement that there must be an average speed—or basically signage to inform people of the average speed system being in operation. This effectively changes the requirement to no longer have to be that the signage is—well basically it means that there now has to be a certificate to prove that there has been—well there's a Supplementary Order Paper—signage at some point in the last year. This is effectively my understanding of what that new clause requires it to be which has obviously changed. But there's no description of what the sign size needs to be.Now I was driving into the city in Auckland the other day and I drove off the motorway—the Spaghetti Junction—you get off at Nelson St and you get to the traffic lights and in the very corner on the left on one of the traffic lights is a little sign and it's probably not much bigger than an A4 piece of paper and it says Average speed check ahead". Now I'm not sure—Simon Court: Was there reo Māori or just English?SIMEON BROWN: It was in English Mr Court. But the question I've got in relation to that is: it's such a small sign you could barely tell and so when you're putting in place signage to warn people of average speed checks surely that needs to be visible so that motorists who are travelling at potentially 40 50 60 if it's high risk 80 kilometres per hour are actually able to notice the signage and be able to see it? I don't see any particular description of what that sign is. But I'm happy to take the Minister down there at some point and show him this sign. It is very very small. My point there is: a lot of motorists would be very concerned if we're going to have average speed checks put in place with very limited signage I think that would not be the intent of the clause which is actually requiring the signage so people have fair warning.The other point I'd make is—I'm not sure if the Minister's aware of that average speed check; I think it's just a trial that Auckland Transport's doing. It would be interesting to know if that's just a trial what they're using that for. But also I would just note that that is a stretch of road which has just had its speed limit reduced from 50 to 40. So again that raises questions back to my first question around where the limitation is to prove that this must only be used on high-risk roads. That road's got a speed limit of 40 kilometres per hour. Is that a high-risk road? How is that going to be determined? Who's determining what a high-risk road is or what's not? I have those questions; I look forward to those answers.Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister of Transport): In respect of where they're deployed that's an operational decision that will be handled by—Simeon Brown: What about high-risk roads? What's a high-risk road?Hon DAVID PARKER: Well I'm advised that that is their intention but it is an operational decision that's not prescribed by the legislation.In respect of where they are I'm also advised that in practice they have to be used in corridors where there are not—the impracticality of doing it on roads where there are lots of points of entry and exit at a short point essentially means that they have to be done on a State highway.In respect of the signage that's not dealt with under this legislation but other rules enable the prescription and land transport rules of what a sign should be like so that it is of a fair size to warn people.The policy objective here is that these cameras aren't designed to gather revenue; they're actually in place in order to improve driver behaviour and that's why you put a warning up rather than just use them to maximise revenue."