Dean JacquiHon JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki): Mr Speaker thank you. It is very telling when members of the Government spend a large part of their contributions in the general debate talking about National—thank you very much to the member who just resumed his seat Rino Tirikatene. When they are not referring to and making nasty personal attacks on colleagues they are delivering platitudes about hard-working New Zealanders. Well that's all very fine and good but there is some real damage being done to this country by this current Government and we are beginning to see the extent of the damage that is being done.We are now getting a picture of what this Government is like. The tensions between the three warring factions are beginning to come out in the way of policy. I will give you an example. That example came to light yesterday in the Government's policy statement on land transport. Earlier in the debate we had the Hon Julie Anne Genter absolutely glowing about the wonderful marvellous—marvellous—21st century traffic solution. What does that really mean? What does that really mean? That means trams for Auckland. What that really means is $5 billion of expenditure that would have gone into the regions being pulled in favour of trams and light rail for Auckland. Tell me how that is good for the regions?New Zealand First must be spitting with rage. Here we have the Green Party over on one side of the House—for those members who follow Parliament—who are talking about a completely Auckland-central funding mechanism. Imagine stealing $5 billion out of the regions and standing up and being happy about it. Then on another side of the House we have New Zealand First and the Hon Shane Jones with his regional investment fund which they say is doing everything for the regions. Where is the compatibility between those two policies? Why are they stealing $5 billion in favour of Auckland and then they have Shane Jones trying to run a very strong campaign for is home town in Northland with his regional development fund? There is a lack of coherency in this Government policy. The trouble is it would be almost amusing if it weren't having a real effect on New Zealanders in the region.I had a chat to a relative of mine who lives down South in my electorate in fact. This relative of mine a lady lives on an invalids benefit—has done all her adult life because she has got cerebral palsy. My relative budgets very very carefully down to the last dollar. She puts the rest of us to shame. She budgets $7 per week for fuel. She needs that fuel so she can go to the doctor so she can go to the supermarket so she can go to the swimming pool to do exercise and so she can go into town and do her job. She is not unlike many many many New Zealanders on low fixed incomes—so $7 a week for fuel. A quick reckoning means that an extra 10c per litre fuel tax on this lady adds $3 to her weekly fuel bill bringing it to $10 a week.Now $3 might not seem like much to some members in this House but for those New Zealanders who budget very very carefully down to the last dollar actually 100-odd dollars a year is a significant dent in their budget which they cannot spend on other things. That is before every other thing that that lady and every other New Zealander in the regions has to factor in: the cost of food and the cost of every other commodity because of the fuel tax going on top. They don't get any benefit out of it because this is a transport policy for Auckland.Do not tell us that this is a transport policy that is in any way going to benefit rural and provincial New Zealand because it is not. It is going to drive cost for ordinary New Zealanders throughout New Zealand—never mind Aucklanders who are going to be paying up to 27c extra per litre of fuel. This is a poor poor policy.