Brown Peter: Public Transport Management Bill — In Committee 
Brown Peter: Public Transport Management Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:650;Page:18635] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 New Zealand First supports this bill with the amendment in my name. 
David Bennett 
: Whose name? 
PETER BROWN 
: In my name. 
David Bennett 
: Who is putting it up? 
PETER BROWN 
: The member over there should learn. He has been here for 2 years. There is an amendment on the Table in my name. I have put it up. 
David Bennett 
: Really? 
PETER BROWN 
: Yes. 
Charles Chauvel 
: The National Party supports it! 
PETER BROWN 
: I think the National Party should look at it. I do not know whether the member over there can read but he should take a damn good look at it and pay a bit more attention to what goes on in this Committee and certainly pay a bit more attention at what goes on in select committees. 
We do not believe that going down the Auckland Regional Transport Authority line is the right way to go. It is not necessary in Wellington it is not necessary in Christchurch and it is not necessary in Queenstown. The full contract system works in many other provincial areas because that is the only option but we believe the Auckland problem could be solved with forward-thinking as they have in Christchurch and in Wellington. When the Infratil people the owners of New Zealand Bus came to us I have to say that I was absolutely immensely impressed by their enthusiasm their determination and their competence. So we are amending this bill to allow for the private operator to have some say in the way the bus network works in Auckland. We are not prepared to go down the track where the regional council dictates what is what because we value enthusiasm determination and competence and we think this bill—[ 
Interruption 
] Certainly as I understand it the Greens are going to move an option C; if option C comes into being then it will stifle those three attributes. 
We know Auckland needs integrated ticketing and integrated services. We know it needs a bundling of services and we think those essential qualities can be achieved by dealing directly with the bus companies. I know that Auckland has had its problems in the past but I believe there is a new will within the bus companies—in New Zealand Bus in particular but also in some others—to improve things for the public. New Zealand First is not prepared to stifle that enthusiasm and that ability to change or amend things by supporting the Auckland Regional Transport Authority approach. New Zealand First will be opposing the bill if it in any way shape or form embraces option C. 
In Part 1 the part we are dealing with now there are a number of amendments in my name. They are minor amendments—technical amendments—and I know there are similar amendments in the Minister’s name on her Supplementary Order Paper 248 I think it is. We have to make a choice and New Zealand First is determined to stick with the amendment in my name on behalf of New Zealand First because we think it will improve the bill. The amendment will give the bus companies a fair go—a fair crack of the whip—and it will allow the Auckland Regional Transport Authority to have the umbrella-type structure it wants but it will be compelled to deal with bus companies. As I said earlier we are not prepared to have a regime in Auckland—even if it is not the capital city it is a major city when it comes to bus transport—dictated to by a regional council with no option and no obligation. 
What concerns us is that the Ministry of Transport undertook a study with a consulting group and with the Auckland Regional Transport Authority and did not make that information known to the bus companies nor even to the select committee. We think that is the wrong way to go. There was some notation in a letter to the select committee but that was all.