Ball DarrochDARROCH BALL (NZ First): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. It's a pleasure to rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak on the Land Transport (Random Oral Fluid Testing) Amendment Bill. We will not be supporting this bill. There is a very good number of reasons for this and I will use the next 4½ minutes to lecture the National Party on just how wrong they are and how self-righteous they are sitting there. I don't want to repeat the entire speech of the previous member that just sat down Iain Lees-Galloway but they had nine years—nine years—to put any sort of legislation in to curb not only the drug-driving issues. We understand that it is an issue—it is an issue—but also the drink-driving fatality crashes in this country.Now that member who was the author of this bill or who's looking after this bill at this stage and presented it to the House Alastair Scott quoted some figures and what he failed to mention was that those figures started from 2013 and they went up and up and up and up—both for drug-driving and drink-driving. So why now? Why has that member—and I'm sure that he'll use his last five-minute call to explain exactly why the National Party didn't do anything when they were in Government.I'd just like to read the purpose of the bill first. The purpose of the bill is to introduce a more effective regime for detecting drug driving in relation to THC MDMA … methamphetamine by allowing for random oral fluid testing by enforcement officers." It's most important to understand that no member in this House or any party in this House disagrees with that purpose. Every single person in this House does not agree I would suggest with anyone driving with any sort of impairment. That member when he stood up and read his first speech said that this bill was about saving lives. If any Parliament was going to vote on any piece of legislation that was going to save lives of course we would—just like that member would have in the previous nine years if his Government actually had come up with the programme that he's saying will actually save lives. If it did then why didn't National do it?I think it's vitally important also to have a look at the attitudes and the advances or lack thereof of National and some of the facts that National had to deal with over the last nine years and some of the statements that they made. The report from the Minister of Transport and there was a report around drug-driving was originally given to the previous National Government who repeatedly declined to include saliva testing—repeatedly declined.Hon Maggie Barry: What's this got to do with the bill?DARROCH BALL: Would that member want to ask that question again? What has this got to do with the bill? You mean what I'm talking about—drug saliva testing. You see that member doesn't like it when it's turned around on the National Party and the facts are laid bare. The facts are laid bare that that member and National didn't do anything about it when they were in Government. Lack of funding from the National Government contributed to a reduction of more than 40 percent in roadside alcohol testing—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes but I do think the member has a point. Would you discuss the bill. Would the member discuss the bill.DARROCH BALL: Well Madam Deputy Speaker I'm talking about the road toll. Now if that doesn't have anything to do with this bill I'm not sure what does.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Well no—just talking about the road toll isn't discussing the bill. If you relate it to the bill then that's perfectly fine.DARROCH BALL: In 2013 Simon Bridges told reporters that accurate testing methods needed to be identified before random roadside drug testing could be introduced—2013. It was included in the Safer Journeys Action Plan—the two-year one. That means that it was ready to do in 2015 and there were no changes whatsoever from National.There has been a massive increase—like that member has spoken about—in the drug-driving fatality accidents since 2015 from 14 to 79 in 2017. Why wasn't anything done? Why wasn't anything done?Alastair Scott: Let's do it now.DARROCH BALL: That member says "Why don't we do it now?" The reason why we are not voting for this piece of legislation is because although we agree with the purpose it will not fulfil its expectations. It will not and this Government is working hard to come up with those solutions that we will be bringing to this House. We agree with the intent. We agree with the purpose but this bill will not achieve what it sets out to achieve. We will not be supporting it."