Lees-Galloway Iain: Land Transport (Road Safety and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Lees-Galloway Iain: Land Transport (Road Safety and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:18072] 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North) 
: 
 This is my first opportunity to take part in the debate on the Land Transport (Road Safety and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. One of the other matters to do with road safety that Labour believes is missing from this legislation is the reduction of the adult blood-alcohol limit from 0.08 grams to 0.05 grams. This is a measure that has massive amounts of support out in the public. It is beyond me that National which is normally very poor in showing leadership and fails to advance an issue unless it has been focused-grouped to within an inch of its life cannot look at the public support for a measure to reduce the blood-alcohol limit to a level that will actually capture drivers who are impaired and will bring down that limit to a point where drivers have to be under a level at which they are impaired to be on the road. 
Given the amount of public support out there for that measure I cannot believe that it has not been advanced in this bill. I mean that is what National is all about. It is what conservative politics are all about. They are about waiting until somebody else tells politicians what to do. The public have told the Government what to do. They would love to see this bill focus on reducing accidents caused by drink-drivers by having that level reduced but it is not there in the bill. 
I suppose that one of the other matters—the title refers to “Road Safety and Other Matters”—is the fact that this is one of the few occasions when Steven Joyce has been rolled on an issue. Steven Joyce runs that Cabinet; everybody knows that. This is one of the occasions when he has actually been rolled. Steven Joyce came out and said it was ridiculous that he could drink the amount required in order to get to 0.08 grams and still be able to drive. But what happened? In typical conservative politics the Government got scared. It got scared that there would be some sort of public backlash. I do not know where it thought the public backlash would come from because the support for this measure is overwhelming. But the Government got scared and it backed down even though Steven Joyce the man who always looks after the optics the man who runs that Cabinet was rolled. That is why this particular measure has been removed from the bill. 
I would like to pick up on Jackie Blue’s point about FebFast. The news out today is fantastic. FebFast raised $100000 for youth alcohol programmes but $100000 is unfortunately a drop in the bucket in terms of what is required. I note that the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee in reporting back on this bill saw early intervention and greater public health measures to support people with alcohol problems and to support drink-drivers to kick alcohol problems as real positives but that the committee felt that those matters should fall outside the scope of this bill. This bill is about road safety and other matters. One of those other matters could have been more support for drug and alcohol services but the select committee said no that fell outside the purview of this bill. 
But the truth is that the cuts that we are seeing this Government make to the health service in New Zealand mean that those services will not be available and we will not be able to tackle the problem of recidivist drink-driving. There are larger prison sentences and we can put a few more people into prison. But in terms of actually tackling the problem the Government has failed to do that not only in this bill but also in the other activities that it is undertaking by cutting the money provided for the health services. This Government is making sure that there will be— 
Michael Woodhouse 
: No wonder he is worried about Leonie if this is all he has to say. 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY 
: Who? 
Michael Woodhouse 
: The person whose business you protested outside. 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY 
: Oh the word has got back to head office. Ha ha! Anyway the member opposite would like to talk about the campaign in Palmerston North. We will have plenty of opportunities to talk about that at some other time. But let us talk about this bill because it is clear that National—[ 
Interruption 
] I tell you what; if the member who is interjecting wants to talk about asset sales we can.