Key John: Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Key John: Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14038] 
JOHN KEY (National—Helensville) 
: 
 As I reflect on Part 3 and the schedules I want to talk for a moment about Auckland Regional Holdings. But before I do so I want to reflect on the comments made by the Green member Keith Locke about public transport. Many of the comments made about public transport are grossly exaggerated. Mr Locke told the Committee that this bill would somehow be the salvation of Auckland and that somehow rail transportation would be the solution to Auckland’s transport problems. This year there will about 2.5 million trips on trains around Auckland. [ 
Interruption 
] Does Mr Locke disagree with me? There will be about 2.5 million trips up from about 2 million. This year there will be a billion trips in cars around Auckland and that number is going up—there will be 1.2 billion before this legislation has had time to dry at the printers. Yet Mr Locke thinks the salvation of Auckland will be public transport and trains. It is false thinking. 
The Greens do not—contrary to public perception—come to Parliament on public transport. When I get my taxi on a Tuesday morning from Wellington Airport I do not see Green members standing outside the bus station waiting for a bus. They travel in a car like everyone else—like everyone in Auckland—and that is the problem. They want everyone else to use public transport but they themselves do not use public transport. Those members do not want to look at the economics. Currently for every train trip around Auckland there is a $10-$20 subsidy—a total of $20 million for 2 million trips a year—and it will go up after this Government has spent about $1.5 billion on the railway network in Auckland. The subsidy for 20 million trips—if the Government can ever achieve that number—will be about $4 per trip so the cost will be about $80 million to $100 million. 
The solution is not public transport; it is to get on and fix the motorway network—to complete what was designed in 1963 or 1965. Auckland has been waiting 40 years and there is no solution in sight. It is an absolute disgrace. No wonder Aucklanders are up at night now wondering what has gone so horribly wrong with this Government which promised them a solution but has failed on every account. 
It has failed in its press releases. My prediction is that very close to the election there will not be any press releases from the Labour Government—from Judith Tizard or from the Rt Hon Prime Minister Helen Clark or from the Minister of Local Government Chris Carter—that fail to talk about roads and cars. That is the sort of stuff that happens when one is making coalition arrangements with the Greens on the Land Transport Management Bill or on this Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Bill. It is important at the moment but when the Government is trying to get votes a couple of months before the election there will be plenty of press releases coming out about roads and cars because that is what Aucklanders really want and need. They know where it is at. [ 
Interruption 
] Well that member will be looking for a new job or he will be back at intermediate school—that is what will happen. He will be back at intermediate school or maybe at high school because he has missed a few years. He will go and learn about cars—that is what will happen. That member will be back at intermediate school being taught about combustion engines. That is the sort of thing that has been going on. 
I want to talk about Auckland Regional Holdings because never in my life have I seen such a sop to a political outfit as there is in this bill. Eighty-five percent of the funds that Infrastructure Auckland worked so hard to preserve and to grow—John Robertson and Richard Maher have done a wonderful job of growing those reserves and of turning hundreds of millions of dollars into the better part of a billion dollars—are to go to transport and stormwater purposes. Lo and behold is all the money to be used to fix roads or stormwater problems? Not on your nelly! Again what is more important is to put aside 15 percent in what could loosely be termed a slush fund to be used for essentially anything that Auckland Regional Holdings and its political appointees find relevant as priorities might change over time. What does that mean? Does it mean that if Labour makes yet another dip in the polls if the Greens look even more like they could be a hopeless coalition arrangement priorities will change and Auckland Regional Holdings will be hijacked once more?