edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Watts Simon; White HelenSIMON WATTS (National—North Shore) (remote): Thank you very much Madam Chair. I just wanted to go back to section 42C in clause 4 of the bill. I appreciate the Minister has commented before around the fact that the three-month duration of which this clause kicks in is not up for debate but I wanted to understand why that's the case when there is a significant amount of reporting particularly out of the US that actually diesel prices are growing and going up considerably more than non-diesel and also the fact that these supply chain issues of which ships and other factors that are using diesel are not looking to be returning back to normal levels any time soon. So in regards to section 42C in clause 4 I'm wanting to get more context and comfort around how the Minister has come to the position that actually three months is all that is required particularly in regards to diesel when internationally all the signals are that things aren't moving back to normal by that point?Hon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Transport): I'm happy to answer the member's question briefly. Three months provides a good impact for household budgets and we've applied that consistently across this bill and the other changes to fuel excise duty and public transport. But as has been noted in this debate some flexibility has been provided potentially to vary that by Order in Council in the future if we determine that was justified.HELEN WHITE (Labour): I move That the question be now put.Motion agreed to.
SpeechHon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Transport): In answer to the questions from the last couple of members: firstly to Mr Menéndez March the Government has responded to the circumstances that are in front of it and is providing relief to New Zealanders through these changes including this bill. He's asked whether we would do it again in the event of a future event. The answer is that we would have to consider the particular circumstances at that time and come up with the best response. In answer to Chlöe Swarbrick's questions I've been reminded that we did receive formal advice from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade that changes of this nature are not officially considered domestically or internationally to be fossil fuel subsidies. I do stand by my comment earlier on that these changes will be progressive in their distributional impacts. Consider family A on an annual household income of $60000 who has to spend $100 on their fuel every week and household B with household income of $200000 per year who does the same. The percentage impact on household A's budget will be more favourable as a result of this policy. These are the interventions that we've considered in the transport space. We have put in place a range of other interventions as part of our 1 April package but obviously they are not a part of this bill or this part.
Swarbrick ChlöeCHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green—Auckland Central): Obviously this amendment bill relates to changes to or reductions of road-user charges which does have substantial impacts as far as Budget goes. So as far as Budget goes and as far as the Government coffers go I do have a number of questions outstanding for the Minister. I'd note that before the Minister indicated that he has an expectation with regard to distributional impacts. That expectation of course exists in the absence of an impact statement with regard to regulation. So as far as that goes and also the absence of a climate impact assessment and noting that transport emissions are the fastest growing emissions profile in the country and the upcoming emissions reductions plans I ask the Minister with regard to whether he has any response to a statement from the Friends of Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform of which Aotearoa New Zealand is a member. They say—and I quote—Fossil-fuel subsidies are a poor social welfare policy and counter-intuitively tend to benefit wealthier consumers." That is of course in quite contradiction to what the Minister has just outlined with regard to his expectations particularly given that the Government announced these reforms of which this amendment bill is a part in relation to increased cost of living pressures.So too I'd like to ask the Minister with regard to the cost impacts of this legislation about the alternative interventions that were considered. He himself just referenced in his contribution in response to other members in this part of the debate the fact that of course half-price public transport was part of the bundle of announcements. It is of course the case that in just doing a back of the napkin calculation the fossil fuel subsidies that exist inside of that part of the announcement are more expensive than the cost of extending free public transport across Aotearoa for everybody for a year and not for three months as this bill would do—Dr Duncan Webb: It's not in the bill.CHLÖE SWARBRICK: —for a 25-odd cent reduction to road-user charges—Dr Duncan Webb. Pertaining to both of those parts around particularly the cost of living which of course this bill was introduced in order to progress and also to the impacts on Government Budget those are the two questions to the Minister around particularly does he agree with the Friends of Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform that fossil fuel subsidies are a poor social welfare policy and counterintuitively tend to benefit wealthier consumers; secondly did he consider those alternative interventions of similar Budget impact noting that there was substantially less money set aside for that half-price fee public transport; and perhaps thirdly on that distributional impacts point as raised by the Minister just before given that there wasn't any front-loaded consideration or officials' consideration of this but on the expectations as laid out will there in future be a review as to those distributional impacts in reality?"
Menéndez March Ricardo; Webb DuncanRICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green): Thank you Madam Chair. So in relationship to Part 4 and the changes to temporary reduction in rates of road-user charges I just wanted to understand the precedent setting of these changes in terms of this not being the first or the last time we're going to see geopolitical events have an impact in the cost of living or fuel. So does the Minister expect to have this bill basically set a precedent where every time a similar geopolitical event happens where there's an impact on the cost of living we're relying on lowering the cost of fuel in order to help families meet the cost of living or does he expect to explore other options that perhaps are more thoughtfully considered and where there is a better impact?Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Junior Whip—Labour): I move That the question be now put.
SpeechCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Before I take the next call I just want to remind the committee again that this is the debate on clause 4 which is amendments to the Road User Charges Act 2012 and while I have already indicated to the committee that due to the circumstances we are finding ourselves in this evening of not having had a select committee process I will allow fulsomeness and some latitude. None the less we are considering clause 4 and so your comments and questions must relate to amendments to the Road User Charges Act 2012. I'm pretty sure that those members who are experienced can work their magic and stay within the Standing Orders.
Swarbrick ChlöeCHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green—Auckland Central): With regard to the Minister's point about this not being considered a subsidy it is of course the case however that these RUC charges as well as the other charges on petrol are—from my understanding—hypothecated in the Government's Budgets. I understand that with regard to this specific legislation change in the amendment and the regulatory changes made with regard to petrol they have been backfilled with COVID-19 funding but none the less this would have otherwise been a hole in the Government's budget which would have effectively been the equivalent of a subsidy given that this is money now being made up from other pots of money within the Government coffers.Madam Chair I have two or three other questions for the Minister and forgive the fact that I am appealing to a number of different resources on my desk at the moment. But it just may be of interest to other members in the committee that Aotearoa New Zealand is a member of what is called the Friends of Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform which Aotearoa has been a part of I might add since the National Party was in Government and formed a review in 2015. It was established in June 2010 for those who are interested and following along at home. It is an informal group of non-G20 countries aiming to build consensus on the importance of fossil fuel subsidy reform.So to that effect and referring to the kind of mission statement inside of the Friends for Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform is the Minister concerned that as New Zealand has historically considered itself a kind of leading member inside of the Friends of Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform these moves keep domestic prices for oil gas and coal—as have typically the other members of the Friends of Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform—artificially low? I will leave it at that point for now.Hon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Transport): Just briefly in response: no I don't share that concern although I understand where the member is coming from. This policy is being implemented because we do have a real concern about some of the cost of living pressures that New Zealanders are facing. I repeat my earlier comment: to the extent that there's a reduction here it's not actually a reduction on the cost of the fuel—I know it seems like a fine distinction—but it is a reduction on the levy that the Government places on that fuel. I think the contextual point that I can add that might give the member some additional comfort is that of course this is part of a broader package to reduce transport costs and I'm very pleased and proud that alongside this we've also brought in half-price public transport fares which I think do go some way towards incentivising people to travel in a way that is more climate-friendly.
Swarbrick ChlöeCHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green—Auckland Central): Just two quick questions for the Minister at this point. The first is: does the Minister consider this to be a fossil fuel subsidy? The second is: can he confirm that in three months' time this subsidy will come off?Hon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Transport): No I don't consider it to be a fossil fuel subsidy because of course neither fuel excise duty nor road-user charges are actually the cost of the fossil fuel in existence. They are a levy that is effectively added to the cost of the fossil fuel that is consumed to fund transport infrastructure. In respect of the second question I think—sorry I've just sort of lost the train slightly. I think it was a question about three months again? Chlöe Swarbrick: Three months—will it go?Hon MICHAEL WOOD: Is it three months? So yes again this has come up a couple of times in debate. The intention in the legislation is for this to be in place for three months. The Government has not considered extending it beyond that at this stage.
Menéndez March RicardoClause 3 Principal ActCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): We come now to clause 3 which is the debate on clause 3 Principal Act". The question is that clause 3 stand part. RICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green): Thank you Madam Chair. I've got some questions to the Minister so I'm following the second reading where we were talking about the interventions to lower the cost of living. I wondered whether the Minister had seen any distributional impact analysis that this bill will have or whether he's looking to seek for some. I'm also interested in the Minister's analysis around the impact this is likely to have on emissions in our other local and international commitments to climate change and whether he thinks that this was the most effective intervention to try and achieve what the bill is trying to do regarding the cost of living and the context of the geopolitical conditions.Hon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Transport): I'm not entirely clear that those matters do come within the ambit of clause 3 but briefly as a helpful Minister I would note that firstly we would expect there to be a positive distributional impact and secondly that in respect of emissions observations and advice from officials so far has tended to be that fuel consumption in New Zealand is relatively inelastic in respect of price.Clause 3 agreed to."
Road User Charges (Temporary RUC Reduction Scheme) Amendment Bill — In Committee—Clause 3
Road User Charges (Temporary RUC Reduction Scheme) Amendment Bill — In Committee—Clause 2
SpeechSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): In response to the Minister who I assume has read the Cabinet Manual and understands that the Governor-General only works at the discretion and the request of Ministers can he confirm that he first and foremost understands this rather important constitutional element—which I'd be concerned if he did not—and can he also—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! Order! The part we are addressing is clause 2 Commencement" which comes into force the day after the Royal assent. I would ask the member—could he sit down please. SIMON O'CONNOR: I can—I'm just stretching my legs.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): I would ask the member to address clause 2 directly. So bring it back to the bill.SIMON O'CONNOR: Well thank you Madam Chair. Look I absolutely want to bring it back to clause 2 because it is the commencement which requires Royal assent. So very importantly this is not a commencement based on a date. It is based simply on the act of a Royal assent which requires the Governor-General acting in the right of New Zealand—and we have just had the Minister tell the committee of the whole House that the Governor-General is going to make a decision of when she decides to apply clause 2 in commencement. I think it's important therefore for the committee of the whole House to make sure that the Minister understands his duties under the Cabinet Manual and the constitution. So once again my question is very simple so that we can understand the application of clause 2 commencement: does the Minister understand that he and Ministers request the Governor-General to do Royal assent—does he understand this very basic constitutional reality? [Interruption]CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members will be silent when the Chair is going through procedural measures. Clause 2 agreed to."
Simpson ScottHon SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): Thank you Madam Chair. Notwithstanding the questions that my colleague Simeon Brown has asked about clause 4 we're debating clause 2 which is the commencement and it says that the Act comes into force on the day after the Royal assent. Now given that we are debating this bill through all stages under urgency my question to the Minister of Transport is relating to the presence of the Governor-General and her warning: is she ready and standing by to sign tonight or is she expecting to wait several days—and if this whole piece of legislation is as urgent as the Government think it should be what warning has the Government provided to ensure the prompt and efficient Royal assent be given?Hon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Transport): The member for Coromandel with all due respect extends his authority a little too far if he believes that either he or I should be able to dictate the point at which the Governor-General provides Royal assent. That will be done through the usual process at Executive Council.
Brown SimeonClause 2 CommencementCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): We come now to clause 2 which is the debate on clause 2 Commencement". This is a very narrow focused debate. The question is that clause 2 stand part.SIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Madam Chair for the opportunity to take a call on the second clause in this bill and the question I've got of the Minister in relation to the commencement clause—it says I think that it comes into force the day after the date of Royal assent. However in clause 4 the actual road-user charge (RUC) reductions don't become available until 21 April. I'd like to ask the Minister to clarify why there is a difference in those two dates and why the Minister is not also making the RUC reductions come into force and available to New Zealanders—which is the intent of this piece of legislation—at a much sooner date such as the day after the date of Royal assent. I have a tabled amendment on the Table which will address this issue in clause 4 but it is of course also relevant to clause 2 which deals with the date of commencement.I think most New Zealanders would be wondering why we're here in urgency today passing this legislation but actually the reality is that this is still not going to become available until 21 April. That comes back to my point: this announcement was made and the delivery is going to take 38 days from the announcement when under the existing piece of legislation the Minister can issue regulations and have the new RUC rates come in in 42 days. It's only saving four days. We could potentially save some more days and get that reduction out to consumers out to taxpayers much sooner if we amended clause 4 on the date at which it comes into force. As I tie that back through to the date of commencement I look forward to the Minister's response.Hon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Transport): As the member himself said in his closing comments his comments mainly related to the provisions of clause 4 which we will get to in due course. What I would say in respect of clause 2 is the fact that the Act comes into effect the day after it receives Royal assent enables Waka Kotahi as the collector to very quickly get on and set up the systems that it will need to have in place in order for the reductions to then come into effect shortly thereafter."
SpeechHon DAVID BENNETT (National): Thank you Madam Chair. The word temporary" is what I want the Minister to answer: does he perceive that is for three months and is it a permanent change or is it going to be a temporary change? If it is a temporary change we just need a yes or no that in three months' time everybody knows that there will be a spike in petrol prices and there will be a spike in road-user charges. That's the simple question. That is the first question. The second question is: if it lasts longer than three months where does the funding come for the transport budget? Is it still going to come from the potential COVID fund or is there some other way that the Minister has envisaged that this non-temporary bill could actually be funding transport in New Zealand because we have hypothecation of transport funding in this country? The third question which is another simple question is: if it does go for further than three months and it is going to be funded through hypothecation what projects will then be cut? What will the Government stop doing in transport to actually make this balance? Does that mean the end of Auckland light rail? Does that mean the end of that wonderful road we heard about in Ōtaki? Does that mean the end of the cycle bridge that we know will come one day under this Government? What are the answers to those three simple questions? They are very simple questions and I'm going to repeat them again for the Minister so he doesn't try and fluff them and not answer them: is this temporary for three months or will it be longer—that's the first question—the second question is: if it is longer where's the money coming from and the third question is: if the money's not coming from the hypothecation and the money's not coming from COVID funds then what is he going to cut to balance the budget?Hon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Transport): In respect of the debate on clause 1 which relates to the title the use of the word "temporary" has its usual meaning which is "not permanent" and is an accurate title for the bill. To the extent that the member raised any other matters of substance which was to a very small extent those are matters which would be addressed in the debate on clause 4.Clause 1 agreed to."
Road User Charges (Temporary RUC Reduction Scheme) Amendment Bill — In Committee—Clause 1
Brown SimeonSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Madam Chair for the opportunity to take a call on this bill during the committee stage. We come to clause 1 which is the title provision if I am correct because this bill doesn't have multiple parts meaning that ultimately it requires each clause to be considered one by one. The title provision says that this bill is the Road User Charges (Temporary RUC Reduction Scheme) Amendment Bill. I think the more apparent name for this bill would be the Road User Charges (Government Panicked at 10 March Poll) Amendment Bill". Kieran McAnulty: Point of order Madam Chairperson. We're less than one minute in and this speaker is already in breach of Speakers' rulings. It's very clear that a debate on the title is to be really defined and any contributions and any suggestions of amendments are to be serious and are not to be used as a critique—Hon Member: Oh serious? CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): OK all right. Thank you. Yes I've—Kieran McAnulty: They are. Hon Member: Are you serious? CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Thank you. Kieran McAnulty: It says in there. CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Thank you very much—thank you. Simeon Brown. SIMEON BROWN: Thank you Madam Chair. The point I'm making here is that as we've already traversed through this debate this piece of legislation has been rushed into Parliament here not in response to the war in Ukraine but in response to a poll which came on 10 March which this Government responded to panicking and made an announcement but failed to actually think through the details of what was actually needed to deliver on that. So I propose that we amend it with a different name on that particular clause. Thank you Madam Chair. CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): I call the Hon David Bennett but in doing so I would just advise the committee that the House is in urgency. Members haven't had a chance to view the bill and haven't had much notice. There haven't been any public submissions so therefore clause 1 will be a more fulsome debate around the bill but I still will require members to address the bill that is in front of them. They've had two readings in which to provide a very full summary of the context of it and when I've been chairing I've been listening to that very carefully. So clause 1 yes—fulsome. Please address the bill."
SpeechIn CommitteeCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): The House is in committee on the Road User Charges (Temporary RUC Reduction Scheme) Amendment Bill. I will remind members that they are able to participate remotely so if you are on Zoom and want to take a call please put the call into the chat. If you want to raise a point of order you should also use the chat function if you're coming in remotely. Amendments have been lodged on this bill and these are available on the Table and on the House papers page. If we receive new tabled amendments I'll advise members so that they can refresh the House page to see the new amendment. Finally it would be helpful for members to ask multiple questions if they have them of the member in charge during their call. Clause 1 TitleCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): So we come first to clause 1. This is the debate on clause 1 the title. The question is that clause 1 stand part.
White HelenHELEN WHITE (Labour): I'm pleased to support the second reading of the Road User Charges (Temporary RUC Reduction Scheme) Amendment Bill. I think that the New Zealand public may be well confused if they were listening to the Opposition at this point. I think I heard David Bennett suggest that in fact this was not a good idea because it would be inflationary. This is a very good idea. I also think I recall that the Leader of the Opposition party talked about a 10c reduction in the payment of fuel—this is a 25c reduction on average. And what this Government did was exactly what it announced. When it announced it it said that the legislation was complex in this area and it has found a way of doing that and delivering to the public exactly what they need at this time which is actually cheaper fuel and cheaper transport in the same package. Which means that I am extremely pleased to see that people who buy 1000 kilometres will save $28 and that will be real money—real money in real people's pockets. Not hot air which is what I've heard a lot of from the Opposition. I commend this bill to the House.
SpeechTERISA NGOBI (Labour—Ōtaki): Mālō 'aupito Madam Speaker. Firstly can I just correct or address an earlier contribution or kōrero by Mr Simeon Brown around the cancellation of Ō2NL–that claim is incorrect. I can confirm that Ō2NL is going ahead—we call that Ōtaki to Levin—having lived in Levin last year when Hon Grant Robertson came to the Southward Museum in the Ōtaki electorate and spoke to the Kāpiti Coast Chamber of Commerce and confirmed that the Ōtaki to Levin road will be going ahead. Just like we completed Transmission Gully just like we'll be completing Peka Peka to Ōtaki by the end of the year; and then we start Ōtaki to Levin. We've also been really lucky that we've already started some of the work there and we've already started to acquire some of the land. So fantastic news. Something that I have lobbied really hard for along with a lot of other people in the Ōtaki electorate. So great news: Ō2NL I can confirm will be going ahead. But to speak again to the bill. Again this bill is in response to what we know is happening at the moment globally. And for us while unfortunately we can't control Russia invading Ukraine—and my heart goes out to the people in Ukraine at this time—and we can't control the global COVID response and pandemic what we can do and are taking action on on this side of the House is what we can control and that is making sure that we support Kiwis during this time. And that is around this fuller package and certainly in this bill is around making sure we reduce the road-user charges by 36 percent especially for our diesel drivers. And that goes towards the bigger package of not just our 1 April changes not just the stuff we've already built on like the winter energy payments the free lunches in schools but it also means that the half-price public transport and the 25 percent off petrol will go along with this and put a bit more pūtea in our whānaus' pockets.
McAnulty KieranKIERAN McANULTY (Labour—Wairarapa): Thank you Madam Speaker. Just for those at home that were watching that if it wasn't immediately clear the National Party intend to vote for this bill and they recognise that New Zealanders need a bit of assistance at the pump.Just to correct what was said by the Hon David Bennett—it was total nonsense utter tripe what he was saying. It was signalled at the time of the announcement—the very press release that Matt Doocey spent six minutes debating—that this change was signalled at the time. It was signalled at the time that it would require legislative change in order to achieve this. And yet tonight we've heard from different National Party speakers different positions. We've heard from Mr Doocey that he's worried that this bill will cut expenditure on roads. Yet Mr Brown has introduced a Supplementary Order Paper that would increase the cut of that very tax—they're not even talking to each other. We heard from Mr Doocey that this bill should have gone to select committee. Yet at the time the transport spokesperson of the National Party said The Government must introduce urgent legislation in the next sitting block." Here we are in the next sitting block bringing through urgent legislation and what does Mr Brown do? Whinge.Anybody that is watching Parliament TV tonight will see that all the National Party are doing is trying to appeal to their core voters whilst they're actually supporting this bill. And if they really wanted to see this get through the House they would just stop the politicking stop the filibustering and let's just get on with making a change that New Zealanders want to see happen."
Halbert Shanan; Salesa JennySHANAN HALBERT (Labour—Northcote): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's great to speak for the second reading of the road-user charges amendment bill this evening. Can I start by responding to the previous speaker's statement—and let me be clear: tax cuts do equate to a reduction in services and not only in health and education but let's be very clear in transport infrastructure in Auckland. If we reduce revenue we take projects away just like Mr Brown's Eastern Busway. So let's be very clear about that team—that tax cuts do equate to a reduction in services. But tonight as we go over the road-user charges amendment bill it's important to acknowledge that fair's fair right? Fair's fair. And what we want to ensure is that the same opportunity the same savings that we have offered in public transport and petrol are afforded to people that drive diesel vehicles. That's what this particular bill is about and we want to afford them that opportunity.I would love to see more people on public transport. I think half-price fares are a great opportunity to get Aucklanders back on public transport lowering emissions and moving people around our city. But I acknowledge that there are a group of people that this particular bill will benefit. We've got to ensure that we are supporting everyone. What we agree tonight is yes we all agree that people are feeling the pinch that there's lower amounts of money that people have to spend on the things that they want to. We're feeling it in supermarkets and we're feeling it at the pump. This Government has acted. We've made movements to change and this piece of legislation is yet another one.Yet the Opposition they want to slow things down is what I'm hearing tonight. They want to say no let's go back to select committee. [Interruption] Mr Brown let's go back to select committee and slow things down. This Government's not about that. We've got to get on with transport. We've got to get on with infrastructure. I commend this bill to the House.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): The next call is a split call. I call on the Hon David Bennett.
Menéndez March Ricardo; Court Simon; Salesa JennyRICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a pleasure to speak on the second reading of the Road User Charges (Temporary RUC Reduction Scheme) Amendment Bill.For viewers I'd like to reference them to my colleague Chlöe Swarbrick's first reading speech which I think contains most of the context of why this bill is in place. As many have noted in the second reading there is a geopolitical context as to why the Government decided to effectively subsidise fossil fuels and subsequently bring in this bill to ensure there's no perverse outcomes for vehicles that use diesel. For us in the Greens we've been really clear from the outset that while we really welcome the Government's intent to reduce the cost of living pressures by for example discounting public transport we feel that a much more effective way of doing this across the board would have been with cash transfers as opposed to trying to do what this bill is trying to achieve which effectively is a really knee-jerk way of addressing the cost of living pressures.While we acknowledge that the cost of diesel and the way that it impacts freight can have a flow-on effect on the cost of items such as food it's really important that on top of looking at things in this bill to reduce the cost of essential items the Government also commits to prioritising better funding for the electrification of our freight system to ensure that the way that we supply essential goods is not so vulnerable to geopolitical shocks.So the Green Party does not support this bill. We encourage the Government to look at other measures that look after our people and the climate and so we won't be supporting it to go to further status. Thank you.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): I call on Simon Court—he got here just in time.
SpeechPAUL EAGLE (Labour—Rongotai) (remote): Madam Speaker thank you for the opportunity to talk for the second reading of this Road User Charges (Temporary RUC Reduction Scheme) Amendment Bill. Can I just reinforce the comments of my colleagues who have noted the geopolitical and economic context for the rationale that underpins this bill. We know as I said in the first reading that these events—one negative being the war and one positive as we recover from the COVID pandemic—have impacted fuel prices across the globe and of course here in Aotearoa New Zealand.Two main points that I'll reinforce. From last Friday 1 April through to June 30 funding will be provided to local government to ensure that the half-price public transport fares that cover the core public transport services will be implemented. And as I said it has already proven to be a hit a winner and social media tells me that—only in the last few hours—every Wellingtonian who decided to catch a train or a bus they're chock-a-block. To finish just to reinforce that road-user charges from late April through to late July will be cut by 36 percent across all legislated rates. We'll hear lots tonight but we know that the Opposition supports this and that's the main point. I commend this bill to the House.
O'Connor GregGREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu): Thank you Madam Speaker. During the first reading I invited that member to go and read the bill. He's had some time to do it but he clearly hasn't. Let me just explain what the overlap licence is. It means that if as one of my Ōhāriu electorate contractors did he has purchased in advance quite a large number of road-user charges (RUCs) so that he is not disadvantaged the overlap licence will now ensure that they are taken into account and that he will actually get full consideration of what he has previously purchased. There wasn't anything that existed in current legislation and that wouldn't have been able to be allowed for.This is a Government that ensures that when we are going to do something significant which is going to assist people like my constituent with a large number of diesel vehicles to work their way through some costs at the moment we do it properly. Because what we don't want to do is have the situation where entrepreneurial people probably smart people say: Hey these things are going to be cheap for the next three months. Why don't I buy my next two years' worth of RUCs?" Now that would be a legitimate thing to do but for this legislation and this legislation is designed to ensure that won't happen. So that will bring the fairness that that member seems to be very concerned is not going to be in there. There will be another reading of this bill tonight or certainly in this session so I would invite that member to go away and have a read of the bill so he understands how some of those concerns will be met. I have no hesitation in commending this bill to the House."
White HelenHELEN WHITE (Labour): Thank you. I rise in support of this very simple and effective piece of legislation. I look at it and I don't think it's actually that complicated Mr Simpson. What I heard when it was the announcement was exactly what has actually occurred. There was an announcement that there would be an immediate reduction in the price of petrol. That petrol went down even before that came into effect and there was an absolute notice that this would happen that there would be a look at what was a complex situation and a practical fix and that's what we have tonight. We have a practical fix by way of urgency and my friends on the other side of the House for some inexplicable reason have decided that they will oppose something which is effectively a reduction in tax. It seems a little ironic to me that they would take that particular approach of opposing urgency.I want to talk to the causes for that urgency because it isn't a little situation and I think the New Zealand public will understand. It's a situation where we have had COVID. It is a situation where on top of that we now have our first European war in quite some time. It's a very serious situation and it impacted on New Zealanders. This Government took it absolutely seriously. And it understood it because I actually have such pleasure in hearing from people like my friend Terisa who comes from the area which is one of the—she's absolutely salt of the earth in terms of her groundedness in that community. And she knows that this is what's affected people and that this is one way that we can bring relief to New Zealanders.And so in this situation what will happen is there will be a capacity for people who buy 5000 kilometres of road-user charge to get an immediate discount of 135 bucks. That is bread on the table. That is a grounded response to a situation that needed to be resolved. That is a good contribution to people's cost of living situations because that's real. And it doesn't need to be held up by the National Party asking silly questions in the next stage. It could actually just happen.This here is a good solution and it's a simple solution and it's a fair solution. And it sits alongside—and I'm very proud of this—a reduction in petrol but also a half-price public transport system so that people who don't have a car and who are reliant on public transport can actually come into my city for free.I am very conscious that the hard edge of what we've been going through in the last 20 years is a movement of our poorer people in Auckland out to our suburbs. So those are the people who most do need this and they actually are going to get it. And they're going to get it from this Government because this Government actually knows that that's where the money needs to be spent; that's where the relief needs to be given. And I am extremely proud of this Government for doing that. I commend this bill to the House.
SpeechTERISA NGOBI (Labour—Ōtaki): Mālō e lelei Madam Speaker. It's always a privilege and honour to stand as the member of Parliament for the Ōtaki electorate but also to take a call in this House of change tonight on the Road User Charges (Temporary RUC Reduction Scheme) Amendment Bill.Firstly can I thank the Minister of Transport his team and of course our leadership from our Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern who acknowledges and wants to support Kiwis by putting in measures like this to be able to help us at this time. As we know due to Russia's invasion of Ukraine and then of course with the COVID pandemic globally and countries starting to open their countries up to travel that's made those fuel prices shoot up. So something like this is something that we need right now for our Kiwis in terms of our budgets and we know that this is part of that bigger piece of work. As we know this Government's put in 25c a litre off petrol. We know in the beautiful Ōtaki electorate we have $2.57 for petrol at the moment and if you shop in our supermarkets you might be able to get 6c a litre off and that'll make it $2.51. So if you're passing through on the awesome Transmission Gully that this Government has also completed please stop in do some shopping get 6c a litre off and go and shop in one of our petrol stations.But aside from that we've also made sure as part of this package—and this bill fits in that wider piece of work—that we're making our public transport half price as well. Again for the Ōtaki electorate that means Ōtaki Waikanae and Paraparaumu through to the capital is half price for that three months and of course the Capital Connection which is all stops from Levin right through which is again really helpful right now for Kiwis' budgets. But of course we can't just leave the diesel drivers out. If we're going to help the people that drive petrol cars help people who are using public transport we need to have these with their RUCs being 36 percent off at the moment for three months. So with that I commend this bill to the House.
SpeechANNA LORCK (Labour—Tukituki): Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise as a proud owner of a navy blue Santa Fe diesel—navy blue. And I've recently on 1 March purchased 8000 kilometres worth of road user charges (RUC). And I did so because I'm one of these people who likes to buy things in advance and not get caught out without enough RUC. So I was very pleased to hear that I will be able to benefit from this reduction in road-user charges for the three months that they are brought in for. Now when I drive my navy blue Hyundai Santa Fe I'm often asked about Why's your car blue?" It's the colour of the flag: it's actually white red and blue. I can say it's the best conversation starter that I could have in talking to my electorate and when I'm out talking to my electorate one of the best things that's happened has been seeing the drop in fuel prices and the drop that we're going to get through our road-user charges. That I must say has made a huge difference for people in the community that I represent. Now National says they're about doing the business—they represent business—and yet today they've said they're not going to vote for this bill. They're going to drag it out. Well my suggestion is that the National Party gets on with the business like we are."
SpeechHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): Thank you very much Madam Speaker. It's my pleasure to rise in qualified support of the Road User Charges (Temporary RUC Reduction Scheme) Amendment Bill. While the Government pats itself on the back for alleviating the pain that people are feeling at the pump they should also look in the mirror for the reasons why that pain is occurring in the first place. As has been mentioned by previous speakers it is very much due to decisions that they have made the pressure that they have put not only on fuel but on housing costs and in the supermarket.I think it's also worth reminding ourselves why we're here. We're here because of the 42-day rule. If it wasn't for the 42-day rule the Government would be able to actually just simply do this by Order in Council. The 42-day rule actually has its genesis in 2008. Those who were campaigning that year will remember the truck protest that occurred because of the significant increase in road-user charges (RUC) that was imposed on diesel users. I think it was Annette King who was the Minister at that time who came out and said Well basically if we didn't put the RUC increase in straight away truckies would go out and buy kilometres well ahead of what they would otherwise have done."Simon O'Connor: Was that Annette King?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: I'm pretty sure it was Annette King Mr O'Connor. That ended up with trucks up and down the high streets in every city and town in New Zealand. It was in response to that and as the Minister has acknowledged it was with the view that the RUC would normally only go up and not down that the 42-day rule was put in place. It occurred because the previous Labour Government did not trust RUC users to do what they should be able to do which is to buy things in advance before the price goes up as if that was some kind of heinous crime to actually give the Government money sooner than they otherwise would to avoid a price increase. Well that's hardly in the spirit of innovation. I would suggest that they are entirely within their rights to be able to do that. So the National Government actually put in place this 42-day rule.It's the right thing to do to be passing this law but I do worry that we are actually wasting the House's time on stuff that actually should be belts and braces in the legislation. I think there is a clause in this bill—and we can flesh this out as we go through it under urgency—where the Government can basically extend this indefinitely by Order in Council. I'm checking with the Minister. Maybe that's the case. We'll find the appropriate clause in it. I'm not sure that's actually good law because this House does need to provide the necessary scrutiny that is to ensure that we're passing robust laws. I'm not convinced that the framework is in place for that to be able to happen and maybe we can put some amendments in place to do just that. So it's with a qualified support that we will continue this conversation and I look forward to seeing how that conversation goes."
Halbert Shanan; Salesa JennySHANAN HALBERT (Labour—Northcote): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's wonderful to be back in the House this evening amongst colleagues and such conversations as good legislation like this particular one the Road User Charges (Temporary RUC Reduction Scheme) Amendment Bill.On 14 March the Government announced moves to reduce the burden of high fuel prices on our Kiwi families introducing a 25c reduction in fuel excise duty and an equivalent reduction in road-user charges. Since February I rolled out my new caravan in the electorate of Northcote and we've been hearing directly from our community around what matters most in Beach Haven and Birkenhead and Northcote—some very very special information. The local community has named the caravan Bert as a side note so come on down and see that. But what we hear from people is that they want to share and have help in the cost of living—it's one of the biggest issues that constantly gets raised with me. And this bill is part of the Government's plan to deliver real relief—to my community and to Kiwi families across Aotearoa.New Zealand like the rest of the world has been hit by a double whammy of inflation caused by shortages as a result of the impact of COVID restrictions that every country—every country—has been forced to introduce to keep people safe and also now by Russia's appalling war in Ukraine a key energy producer which has led to a global spike in fuel prices. We have all seen the impact of these costs at the pump we've seen them in the supermarket and we've seen them impact on families all across our communities. And so this particular piece of legislation this evening is about helping families where we are able to and I commend this bill to the House.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): The next call is a split call. I call on the Hon Michael Woodhouse.
SpeechURGENCYHon MICHAEL WOOD (Deputy Leader of the House): I move That urgency be accorded to the passing through of all stages of the Road User Charges (Temporary RUC Reduction Scheme) Amendment Bill.This bill is part of the Government's response to the rapid increase in fuel prices that's had an impact on households and businesses across the country following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Its intention is to reduce road-user charges to provide equivalent relief to motorists with a diesel vehicle that is equivalent to the reduction that has been achieved through the 25c reduction to fuel excise duty as amended by Order in Council in March.The need for the legislation is immediate. It's essential that it's enacted as soon as possible under urgency so that its provisions can have maximum effect. It's essential that there is a period between enactment and the beginning of the temporary reduction period so that essential administration can be put in place by Waka Kotahi to ensure the smooth roll-out of the scheme.