O'Connor Greg; Goldsmith Paul; Parker DavidLAND TRANSPORT (ROAD SAFETY) AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteeDebate resumed from 22 August.Parts 1 to 3 Schedule 1 and clauses 1 and 2 (continued)CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Members the House is in committee for further consideration of the Land Transport (Road Safety) Amendment Bill. When we were last debating the bill the question was that Parts 1 to 3 Schedule 1 and clauses 1 and 2 stand part.Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): Thank you Mr Chair. When we left this debate we were particularly concerned around the average-speed cameras. This bill—just to recap for people who are tuning into this debate—was introduced by Kiri Allan as justice Minister some time ago and it was mainly around fleeing drivers and giving officers the ability to seize and impound vehicles for 28 days if the driver doesn't provide information and disqualification. All of that is of interest and we broadly supported that because we all know we've got a real issue on that front. But also they took the opportunity when doing this bill to sneak through a couple of other things in relation to the Government's focus on speeding and in particular point-to-point speed cameras.I was making the point before we ran out of time of how this operates in conjunction with what we've seen as a rapid roll-out of 30-kilometre-an-hour speed limits all around the countryside and our cities much to the annoyance of people who have got places to go and things to do. They look at the fact that their cars have never been safer they've never had more technology and yet we have to crawl around at 30 kilometres an hour and it's very irritating. So the thought of having a point-to-point camera for a kilometre on a 30-kilometre-an-hour road—and I'd like the Minister to give us the answer to the calculation which is d times 3.6 divided by t" in relation to distance being a kilometre and the speed being 30 kilometres an hour and just what the answer is. If he could give us that answer that would be useful.But the point we're making is: what advice has he had when it comes to—this is all about safety ultimately. Why hasn't the Government focused on all the other many factors involved in serious crashes and injuries and death such as drink-driving? We know that there has been a huge reduction in the number of drink-driving tests around the country so why don't they focus on that? Why don't they focus on drug-driving where they still haven't got round to actually bringing in an effective drug-driving test? Why don't they focus on seatbelts which are critical? Why don't they focus on driver distraction around cellphones and fatigue and all the many other things—and of course the quality of the roads and dealing with the potholes and actually building safer roads? But instead of focusing on all those issues the only thing they focus on when it comes to safety is speed limit reductions and driving people crazy. So we don't think that they've got the balance right at all. In fact the suspicion is that really the real reason why they focus on speed is that they don't really like people driving cars full stop and they want to make it as difficult as possible and as frustrating as possible for people to get around particularly in cities.So what I'm keen to hear from the Minister is: why the focus is so much on making us crawl around at 30 kilometres an hour particularly in relation to schools where they've adopted the approach—and it's filtered through to all the little councils around town—that there should be a 30kilometre speed limit anywhere near a school 24 hours a day? I don't know maybe I've missed something. I've got 4 kids who have been to school and I've never dropped them to school at 2 o'clock in the morning. I've never dropped them to school at 5 o'clock in the morning. I've never picked them up at 8 o'clock at night. There's actually about a 10-minute—Simon Court: Maybe if they'd been on a rowing crew you might have dropped them off at 5 a.m.Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Maybe. They're not focusing on their school work as much as they should—maybe. But maybe they're just lackadaisical about the whole thing. But in general there's about a 20-minute window at around 8 o'clock in the morning and another 20-minute window at about 3 o'clock in the afternoon where maybe it might make sense to have a 30-kilometre-an-hour speed limit within about 100 metres of a school. But no we've got about a kilometre 24 hours a day and it's all about again—and I just want to test this proposition also with the Minister: was it not his purpose when he came into Government when he came into Parliament to try and make life easier for New Zealanders? And if it was his goal when he came into Parliament to make life easier for New Zealanders why is he bringing in point-to-point cameras and 30-kilometre-an-hour speed limits everywhere? Because that's not making people's lives easier; it's just making them annoyed and irritated. We don't support this element of the bill.Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister of Transport): The member Paul Goldsmith asked why we're not focusing on road surface repairs; we are. After a period of about five years—of the last five years of the National Government—when because they were spending so much on their roads of national significance and froze road funding for maintenance the number of kilometres of road being repaired for surface or surface replacement halved roughly. You need to do about 9 percent per annum; it dropped to 5 or 6 percent per annum and we've restored that. But we need to do more and indeed the latest draft Government Policy Statement on land transport proposes a further 50 percent increase in funding on maintenance. So that's certainly within the bill.In terms of cellphones drunk-driving drug-driving and more safety measures like safety barriers I agree with the member that they are all important but also speed is relevant. Tragically last year 377 people were killed on our roads in New Zealand. That's 7.3 deaths—7.3 people—per 100000. By comparison Australia's average across all states is 4.6 deaths per 100000 whilst in Europe it's significantly lower with two deaths per 100000 people. It's not all related to—Simeon Brown: You're just reading the talking points.Hon DAVID PARKER: "Reading the talking points" did the member say? It would help if he read his rather than just blathering on as he often does. Some of the—Simeon Brown: It's the nasty party.Hon DAVID PARKER: The nasty party? Speed is a factor. And in terms of the member's concern that these cameras are going to be used on 30-kilometre areas I'm advised that that's not the intention; they're going to be deployed on high-risk roads."