Fenton Darien: Road User Charges Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Fenton Darien: Road User Charges Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 09 February 2012. Volume:677;Page:304. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 I am pleased to take the opportunity to make a contribution on the third reading of the Road User Charges Bill. I have been through the process of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee with the chair David Bennett and he is back—he is back! Actually I did note a very conciliatory approach to the committee this morning which I thought was very welcome. We look forward to a much more inclusive approach to concerns from the major party of the Opposition. So I am looking forward to this year actually; I think you know that we have got work to do—there is no doubt about that.  
But on the Road User Charges Bill Labour has repeatedly raised our concerns about this bill. We raised them in the select committee. We voted against two parts of the bill in the select committee. We have raised them in all of the readings of the bill including the Committee stage and it is fair to say that we still continue with those concerns even though we are intending to vote in favour of this bill because we believe that the good things in the bill outweigh the concerns that we have. 
 Now my colleague Phil Twyford talked quite a lot about our first concern which is about the shift from nominated weights to gross weights as the basis for charging road-user charges so I will not go into that too much. But I wanted to address our second concern which is the one about regulations being signed off without public debate or consultation. The concern from the industry was first of all that there had been very little consultation about this bill itself when it came in. That was reflected in all of the submissions that we heard. The second concern was that it is going into this whole new regime in the dark. The industry has no idea—very poor indications—of what it might mean. That is why we have seen concerns from some of the major players like the—what are they called? 
Phil Twyford 
: Motor Caravan Association. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: —the Motor Caravan Association. But also I do not think that David Bennett can tell the Labour Party to get into the real world when we have similar concerns from companies like Fonterra. Fonterra one of our most successful companies in New Zealand and Toll New Zealand have expressed similar concerns and a range of small to medium trucking firms. Also in the submissions concerns were expressed by some of those who are trying to work in the industry to modernise it through using new technology. I think it is a bit poor to write them off as not being important and saying that Labour is not in the real world. In fact Labour did go and speak to many of these organisations. We took the trouble—and I am not sure that the Government did—to go and visit Toll New Zealand Fonterra A One Movers and a whole range of organisations and I must say that my education about road-user charges— 
Michael Woodhouse 
: That’s fantastic.  
DARIEN FENTON 
: Yes it is fantastic is it not? It is really good but you know their concerns have continued Michael Woodhouse. They continue and I do not think that we have reached resolution in this bill in its third reading that allays those concerns.  
I also found it really interesting that the member David Bennett—I nearly said “David Benefit” I am sorry—[ 
Interruption 
] I know I know that is right it is the wrong committee but I also found it a bit rich that the member David Bennett was talking about you know how the Parliament cannot set the rates and so on. When we think back to what happened in 2008 which was the big truckie strike which was really political actually—it was driven by the Road Transport Forum and it was obviously designed to destabilise Labour in the period coming up to the election—the then Minister of Transport the formidable Annette King had made a decision that she would not advertise and consult on the changes to the road-user charges because if she did there would be upfront buying and the Crown would lose I think it was around $17 million. [ 
Interruption 
] Yes it is interesting. She made that decision and she made it in the interests of New Zealand taxpayers so there could not be that sort of thing happening.  
Now what we have got is a Government that is justifying increasing road-user charges and changing road-user charges through regulation without—oh there may well be consultation but it is not clear in the bill how that public consultation will take place. Certainly the submissions that we had from the industry what we have heard from the industry and the discussions that we have had with it is that it is very concerned about the breaking of the basic democratic principle that there should be no taxation without representation. So it is ironic that we went through all of this in 2008 and the National Party took the moral high ground and here we are in 2012 passing a bill that actually does away with the right to consultation for changes in road-user charges. I hope that the Hon Annette King will have a chance and I am sure she will to make a contribution on this bill because I think she will have some things to say about that because she was actually in the forefront of that. She was in the firing line at the time. We know these things are complicated. Labour is a much more understanding party of the Government than the National Party was when we were in Government so we tend to try to be cooperative about it. But I think the fear is still there in the industry which is about what these charges actually mean. It does not know. So then you get the various examples that we have been given in this debate from various organisations: real concern about the increased cost to small business but medium-sized businesses as well—real concerns about that—and leaving the industry in the dark.  
Here we are passing a bill in its third reading where the industry still has no idea what the change in these charges is going to mean. I think it is as I said pretty rich of the Government to now say “We can’t possibly do any of this stuff because it is too difficult; we can’t pass it in Parliament.” when National was right there boots and all encouraging the industry in 2008 because it saw a political advantage. In fact now it is justifying it so it will be interesting I think to see exactly how the industry responds. I think there will be winners and losers. I fear that the winners are those who are in the big trucks and the losers will be in the small parts of the industry who are just trying to get on with business and make a living. I think that there will be concerns that start to be raised.  
I think the other thing that underlies this whole thing is that we are very supportive of road-user charges. It is a very unique system in the world. It is a system that we should be proud of and in fact it is being adopted by other countries now as they realise that tax on diesel and petrol is not actually going to deliver the income needed— 
Debate interrupted.