Roche Denise: Land Transport Management Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoche Denise: Land Transport Management Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 04 June 2013. Volume:690;Page:10708. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DENISE ROCHE (Green): I rise to take the last call on this bill the Land Transport Management Amendment Bill for the Greens. We will be opposing this bill because as the House has heard from my colleague Julie Anne Genter it is completely flawed. It is weighted towards roads roads and more roads as the only transport option. It allows this Government to borrow to fund infrastructure that may not stack up economically. It allows for public-private partnerships and road tolling so it privatises more of the public purse. Worst of all this bill once more strips decision making away from Auckland.What is it about this Government? Why does it hate Auckland so much? One of the first things this Government did when it came into power was to remove Auckland’s regional fuel tax. It was being collected to invest in public transport—things like the electric trains—and was an opportunity for Auckland to save up for the central rail link which has been on the agenda for years. In the Auckland Council’s submission to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee it specifically asked to retain the ability for the council to gather regional fuel taxes because as the council said in its submission: “It is important to not pre-empt the outcome of Auckland’s investigation and consultation process in relation to alternative transport funding mechanisms by removing one of these mechanisms. Auckland Council considers that the removal of regional fuel tax as a potential funding option could be inconsistent with consultation principles established in case law.”This bill not only undermines the council’s ability to raise money for transport options but it also says that whatever decisions the council makes about the spending priorities it may have they have to be consistent with the Government’s policy statement. As noted in the verbal submission from the Auckland Council this provision—what the Government is trying to do here—cuts across section 15 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 which states that the governing body of Auckland Council is responsible and democratically accountable for setting transport objectives in Auckland.The ratepayers in Auckland contribute about $400 million a year to Auckland Transport for transport infrastructure. I remind the House that it is not just roads. It is actually public transport walking and cycling options. It is not just the roads that the Minister may have chosen for dodgy uneconomic reasons. I spoke with the chair of the Auckland Transport board today councillor Mike Lee who says that this Government has deliberately singled out Auckland in this piece of legislation and has at least been consistent in its approach to dismantling any type of democracy for the region.The super-city legislation was the first go the Government had. The legislation for the forced amalgamation also created the council-controlled organisation Auckland Transport which is now with this legislation fast becoming a Government-taking-control organisation. We have seen since then that the Government has sought to undermine Auckland Council in every way—in the Resource Management Act changes in the decision-making process around the unitary plan in the changes to the Local Government Act and more recently with the housing bill that will force Auckland into more urban spread when Aucklanders want a compact city.The Auckland Council submission points out the potential for conflict when it says in its submission that “The provisions relating to the Auckland Regional Land Transport Plan need to take into account the different governance arrangements in Auckland and the existence of the Auckland (Spatial) Plan.” which was required of it by this Government when it set up the super-city. This Government has interfered so much in Auckland that it is fast becoming the worst nanny State Government in history.We will not be voting for this bill. It cedes power to the Government so that it can give more power to its vested interests. The Skycity deal is a classic example of that. With this interference there is less control for ordinary citizens over their environment and indeed over their lives. We will not be voting for it.