Wood MichaelMICHAEL WOOD (Labour—Mt Roskill): I am happy to speak on the title and commencement sections of the Land Transport Amendment Bill (No 2) and in line with the previous speaker David Seymour I do think that the title of the bill is an apt one. When you look back in the statute book there have been numerous amendments to this Act and that is because land transport is a dynamic area in which technology is constantly changing practices are constantly changing and new policy issues are arising.When I look at this there are three key areas of land transport that it seems to me this bill addresses. One relates to the safety of the land transport system and that part of the bill that specifically relates to vehicle interlocks was actually one in which there was a good deal of accord from around the Chamber in terms of the changes that are being introduced there. Land transport safety is incredibly important. We have had approximately 320 New Zealanders who lost their lives in the previous calendar year and we know that a significant number of those people lost their lives because of people who were under the influence of alcohol. So we on the side of the House think that any measures that improve the safety of the land transport system in respect of people who are alcohol-impaired are to be applauded and the changes in this bill in respect of the alcohol interlocks we think are a practical measure. It is addressing an improved piece of technology that we have and we think it is a really smart set of changes and so we are fully in support of those changes to make our land transport system safer.There are changes in respect of the efficiency of the land transport system. They have not been particularly commented on in the debate here and again I think this was a relatively uncontroversial part of the bill in respect of some of the technical bits of the legislation that relate to heavy vehicles. Basically the legislation smooths off some of the rough edges that we currently have in that area.The other part of the land transport system that this bill addresses or does not address is consumer protections. My colleague Sue Moroney has spoken I think really clearly and effectively about some of the concerns that we have on the side of the House about the lack of consumer protections that are built into this bill in respect of small passenger vehicles. What we have said and in fact what submitters said throughout the select committee process is that there is a huge amount of openness to consumers being offered more choices through the use of ride-sharing technologies. Pretty much everyone is open to that but what we on this side of the House wanted to see in respect of land transport consumer protection were some basic bits of public-good regulation put into this legislation that would provide those protections—simple things like Braille signage and in-car cameras things that people can expect when they take our small passenger vehicles at the moment for the most part. I think some of the responses that we received in this debate simply did not satisfy our concerns in that area.I was also disappointed that we did not get progress in another area of consumer protection in respect of the land transport system and that is in the area of vehicle clamping in my Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 345 which was narrowly voted down. This is an area that has been of real concern around Auckland. It is totally unregulated. It is just a voluntary code which gives a minimal level of protection to consumers and is basically ignored by some of the sharks operating around Auckland. We have had terrible stories coming through the media of consumers who have been completely predated on and ripped off by these people many of them in Mr Seymour's electorate in fact and he voted against giving those constituents a level of protection through my SOP which would have simply picked up the Government's current voluntary code and actually given it some teeth. That is all it would have done but sadly that was voted down tonight. So we missed an opportunity for consumer protection there.I would not be doing my job on behalf the Regulations Review Committee if I did not note the level of concern about the commencement section where once again we are seeing a level of looseness in respect of commencement. Once again we are seeing a lack of clarity about the dates upon which certain parts of quite a consequential Act will come into force. So in clause 2(1) the Commencement of amendments relating to alcohol interlock sentences … on 1 April 2018"—fine—"or on an earlier date appointed by the Governor-General by Order in Council". We simply do not see the need for that level of legislative looseness and we would prefer to see it kept at 1 April 2018. The same goes in respect of small passenger vehicles. We have expressed our concern there but at the very least we think that given the huge numbers of people who are potentially affected both consumers and current operators by this law we should give them the certainty of when these changes might take effect and not leave it to the whim of the Minister. Thank you.Clause 1 agreed to.The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 328 in the name of the Hon Simon Bridges to clause 2 be agreed to.Amendments agreed to.Clause 2 as amended agreed to.Bill to be reported with amendment presently.House resumed.The Chairperson reported progress on the Appropriation (2017/18 Estimates) Bill and reported the Land Transport Amendment Bill (No 2) with amendment.Report adopted."