Henare Tau: Land Transport Amendment Bill (No 4) — Third Reading 
Henare Tau: Land Transport Amendment Bill (No 4) — Third Reading 
[Volume:655;Page:4617] 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
: 
 I was going to just go through a summary of where I think the bill is but the previous speaker Sue Moroney brought up the issue of horses. I say that that member not so long ago spoke publicly against the very tax break for horses that she agreed with when Winston Peters was the Minister for Racing. That is the sort of thing we get from the Opposition. The debate on this bill started really really nicely with everyone was patting each other on the back but the last two Labour speakers the one before Sue Moroney— 
Hon Nathan Guy 
: Who was it? Hipkins? 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: Yes. Chris Hipkins suggested all sorts of things about there not being any money in the kitty. Let us be serious about this. This bill was introduced in 2007. It is now midway through 2009 and the only reason this bill is where it is today is because of the good work of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and because of the efficiency of a National Government that wants to do things. It is about good chairpersonship it is about a good Minister and it is about a Government that wants to get ahead and stop dilly-dallying and playing politics like the last member was doing. 
The bill is about three things. Let us concentrate on the small administrative matter: the continuation of the Land Transport Act 1998 and other little bits and pieces that have to happen. That is the administrative part. The next part is about protection; it is about protecting the privacy of individuals in this country so that private citizens know that their information will not be bandied about by stalkers by all sorts of miscreants and even by some of those people who get into telemarketing. 
The big stuff I want to talk about in the third part of the bill is the drug issue. I think that is the key issue to this bill. The Greens have called it a blunt tool some have mentioned that it is a discriminatory practice and some have called it other things. The key here is about saving lives. The key here is about making sure that if you drink and drive and if you take drugs and drive—yes I am speaking absolutely to you Mr Deputy Speaker and that is why I am using the word “you”—then you are pinged for it. We can go through all sorts of reasons why people drink and drive and take drugs and drive and we can blame it on this that and the other thing. But drink-driving and drug-driving would not happen if people did not get behind the wheel of a vehicle. It is as simple as that. This is one time when I think the psychologists the researchers and the analysts of all kinds who dream up reasons why people do things have got it wrong. The clear message is that this community does not put up with and will never put up with people getting behind the wheel of a vehicle in a drug-impaired state. The message is quite simple: people should not smoke and drive needle and drive or swallow drugs that they should not be using and drive. It is quite clear that this bill is about the protection of the innocent. 
I finish by mentioning something that came up in the select committee about research and what happens to the blood samples after they have been tested in a hospital. My colleague Te Ururoa Flavell mentioned this issue in the Committee stage and I raised the issue also at the select committee. I am satisfied that the further research that the bill talks about is only about the drug issue. The blood samples will not be used for any research purposes other than that. I want to put that on the record and assure my colleague that I think the issues he raised and that I raised in the select committee have been worked out in a manner that assures us that those samples will not be used for some sort of Frankenstein research along the way. 
I commend this bill to the House but we should be mindful that it is only a small step. As some of my colleagues have said previously different drugs come on to the market—it seems like an everyday occurrence—and we have to be up with the play. We also have to be up with the play in terms of the technology that we have at our disposal to grab these people who do not like themselves and do not like anybody else. Why else would they be drug-impaired and alcohol-impaired behind the wheel of a vehicle? Kia ora. 
Bill read a third time.