Genter Julie Anne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGenter Julie Anne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 18 March 2014. Volume:697;Page:16730. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]8.JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green)to the Minister of Transport: Can he confirm that by the end of this fiscal year the Government will have spent $1.5 billion on work classified as having a “low” benefit to cost ratio under its roads of national significance programme?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Transport):The analysis the questioner relies on is provided by the New Zealand Transport Agency. The Government makes its own decisions though about value-for-money expenditure. It is not a slave to bureaucratic formula and therefore considers other matters in making its decisions. The Government considers the roads of national significance to be excellent expenditure.Julie Anne Genter: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This was a question on notice and it was a yes or no question and I did not hear a yes or a no in the Minister’s answer.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Again the Standing Orders are quite clear that no member can demand a yes or no answer. Again I can understand why the member does not feel that it was adequately addressed and I accept that. On this occasion the question in my opinion has been addressed but I will allow the member an additional supplementary question to try to tease it out to the member’s satisfaction.Julie Anne Genter: For clarity has he spent $1.5 billion on low-value work under the roads of national significance programme as stated in his answer to written question No. 813 and is he now trying to justify that waste by calling it strategic?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: The question the member asked me to respond to indicates the benefit-cost ratio on both the 6 percent and 8 percent discount rate for a number of roads. The roads that she is most likely to be focusing on are the Waikato Expressway the Tauranga Eastern Link road and the Wellington Northern Corridor. The Government considers those to be very important. They are strategic and we most certainly do not agree with the Green Party that it is inappropriate or low-value expenditure.Julie Anne Genter: Given that none of the spending on the roads of national significance has been high value and that nearly half the spending on walking and cycling in the last year was high value would it not be a better use of taxpayer money to prioritise high-value walking and cycling projects?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: One of the problems the member would leave unanswered is what you would do with the volumes of freight that have to get moved around New Zealand if you required them to be moved by bicycle or pushcart.Julie Anne Genter: In light of the National Freight Demands Study released last week which shows that road freight has fallen since 2006 and that the expected rate of growth is less than was forecast when his Government began this roads of national significance programme is now not an appropriate time to reconsider whether spending billions of dollars on projects that his own Government considers low value is the best use of taxpayer money?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: The first point is that I dispute the analysis that the freight volumes have fallen. What I would say is that vehicle kilometres travelled have fallen and that is largely due to a more efficient roading network which has an excellent outcome for greenhouse gas emissions.Julie Anne Genter: Does he stand by his reply to my question last week that the only reason he does not support the Greens’ plan to take a tiny amount of money—$50 million a year—from low-value projects and invest it in high-value walking and cycling projects is that “I am a member of the National Party.”?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: That is a very very selective quote. I think it was most unkind of the member to throw that at me without the full qualification of what I actually said. That was that simply there is no Government in New Zealand’s history that has ever spent as much on walking and cycling as this Government and we will continue to do so where it makes good sense. But that will not mean that we stop building roads which drive the economy.Julie Anne Genter: So is the Minister really saying that he is going to continue to prioritise projects that have low economic efficiency rather than spending that money on projects that will have greater economic benefits greater transport benefits and greater benefits for the environment and public health?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: No that is not the case. What we are doing is spending money to get an efficient transport network. We are also spending a lot of money to give people choice about their pedestrian and cycling options. No Government has ever spent more on that than we are. I do not know why the Greens cannot congratulate us on that.Julie Anne Genter: Does the Minister understand that duplicating motorways to the Kāpiti coast or Wellsford does nothing to alleviate serious congestion in our city centres—in fact according to the New Zealand Transport Agency they make congestion worse—whereas investing in smart projects like walking and cycling to school take cars off the road eases congestion and improves public health?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: It also very seriously inconveniences the people who pay for those roads and their commitment to these projects will be seen at the ballot box.Julie Anne Genter: Is an accurate summary of the situation that the Government has spent $1.5 billion on low-value pet projects while underfunding high-value walking and cycling projects and dismissing low-cost high-value plans such as the Greens’ safe walking and cycling to school policy which is not only good for kids but good for road users because it is better value for money?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: No. The truth is that the Government is spending on the seven roads of national significance and has considerable public support for continuing to do so. The Government is spending an enormous amount of money on cycling and pedestrian initiatives and will continue to do so. It is a shame that the Green Party cannot see that the only way that you are going to get better environmental outcomes is to have a stronger economy which since Roman times has meant to have good roads.Julie Anne Genter: I seek leave to table a report from the OECD that shows that there is no correlation between investment in motorways in New Zealand and economic growth.Mr SPEAKER: On the basis that it might be difficult for members to track that—[Interruption] The member wants to know from what year is the OECD report.Julie Anne Genter: It was from 2008.Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table a 2008 OECD report. There is objection.