Foster Andy; Tuiono TeanauANDY FOSTER (NZ First): Thanks Mr Speaker. Look we all agree that the Cook Strait crossing is an essential part of New Zealand's transport infrastructure and we all know it's a problem which is why we're having the debate that we're having at the moment. However Tangi Utikere opened this debate by essentially stating that plan A is still the right plan is still a good plan—two large ferries. I'll come back to that in just a moment. But I say to him and to the Opposition: let's stop playing politics with this; let's work together to try and find the solution.Plan A was fundamentally flawed. We know that the cost of iReX project had blown out enormously. I would take that as an illustration that what we've got to stop doing is saying We think that a project is going to cost"—in this case—"$750 million." before we've done any of the design assessment before we've done any of the geotechnical work and before we have actually any real idea of what it's really going to cost. But no we go and say "It's going to cost $750 million." and then a few years later it turns out to be "It's $3 billion and counting." So the initial thing we should do with all of these projects is to be putting money aside to look at options to look at feasibility to look at geotech—to look at all those things—and then we've got some vague idea of what the cost is going to be. But that's not what happened in this case.The Opposition has told us that the ferry deal was a very good one. Actually the ferry deal was a good one. It was a good one because it was done during COVID it was done at a time when ship builders didn't have a lot of market but the problem was that this is a package. It's not just a ferry; it is also a ferry and all the land-based infrastructure. We've already heard from the Minister there that the cost effectively of the land-based infrastructure exploded not by a factor of one but a factor of 10 times—10 times more expensive. You can't have the ferries without the land-based infrastructure as well.So Tangi Utikere we had a plan but the problem is that the plan was deeply flawed. Even—Hon Dr Duncan Webb: Your plan.ANDY FOSTER: —the then Minister of Finance Grant Robertson knew that it was a flawed plan. I don't think that he signed off on it did he Mr Webb? He didn't sign off on it either.The big problem here was that KiwiRail I think were exceedingly arrogant. I think that what basically they assumed is that everybody was going to jump to their tune. That was their assumption and I'm going to come to some illustrations on that. They ordered the ferries before they had anywhere to put them—they ordered the ferries before they had anywhere to put them. I can remember at the time when that was news thinking that is extraordinarily brave—extraordinarily brave—to the point of being reckless.The other piece of information that we've had more latterly is that the port of Marlborough harbour master hadn't even given approval—in fact I don't think at that point he'd even been asked to give approval—for whether these larger ferries would be able to operate in Tory Channel. He gave the indication that in fact he wasn't going to give that approval. So an extraordinary piece of work from KiwiRail.So let's talk about the port infrastructure at either end. At both ends they are very difficult construction environments—at the Wellington end particularly the seismic and sea-level rise. So look at this an overall package: roughly one-sixth of the package is for the ferries; one-sixth is for the port of Marlborough end; and a whopping fourth-sixth—two-thirds of it—is from the port of Wellington end. That reflects the complexity of that end. It was $3 billion and counting. So either the incoming Government wrote a blank cheque and said "Look just keep going. However much it's going to cost keep going."—and we know the business case for that would have been appalling—or push pause and think about that. Those of us who are members of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee would recall that KiwiRail appeared before us in February as part of their annual review and both the chair and the CEO made the point that they had only come to the company in 2022. When they came to the company they said actually they were alarmed at what they saw and they alerted the then Minister of Finance to their concerns. So it's not as though the new administration of KiwiRail was saying this was all beer and skittles; they had real concerns. What I saw KiwiRail having done is wasting years and years of time that should have been used constructively to deliver an outcomes.So let's take the Wellington end. They wanted to bring large new ferries into the inner harbour of Wellington didn't mind about any other users no mind about the impact on CentrePort's business—they were stuck right in the middle of CentrePort they were effectively destroying the business—and no mind about the impact on the road network from having road and rail services at a new location. They didn't mind about any of that; they just assumed that everybody was going to jump to their tune. They did exactly the same thing at the other end with the port of Marlborough as well to the extent that the port of Marlborough said "Yours. Your project. You work it out."So we have a fundamental problem here. It's a problem that we need to work together on. I'm really looking forward to seeing the outcome of the ministerial working group. That is the basis on which we should be moving forward from this. Anything else at this stage is speculation.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): Before I move to the next speaker just for the awareness of the House if a party does not take their allocated call and there is no indication that they have transferred it any other member who has not yet spoken may seek that call at the end of the debate."