Ross Jami-LeeClauses 1 and 2JAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany): Thank you Madam Chair. I rise to speak to an amendment—there's a couple of amendments actually; I've just put a couple more into the Table Office—in my name but also to say that in principle this side of the committee will be opposing the title and commencement of the bill as one would expect because we are opposed to this bill proceeding any further. We are also opposed to the bill's timing because we do not believe there's been sufficient work done around a whole range of issues that we've already discussed. The reason why I've put forward my amendment is because I think there are some circumstances in which the issue of a regional fuel tax being in existence should actually fall out of place and should actually have an automatic repeal inserted into the legislation. The reason why I've done that is because the price which people pay for fuel in this country impacted by tax hikes that the Government is responsible for is a matter that should be considered as to whether a regional fuel tax should proceed.I have questioned the Minister multiple times in question time to ask him whether he would show some consideration to the cost of fuel that people are paying and I've asked him whether he would consider abandoning his plans for new tax hikes if the cost of fuel got to $3 a litre. Consistently the Minister has refused to make a decision on that or give me an answer claiming that it's a hypothetical. Well it might be a hypothetical that the cost of fuel might get to $3 a litre but it is a very real possibility out there and it's a very real possibility that has been discussed in the media—and I'd say actually many New Zealanders are concerned about the price they will be paying at the petrol pump and are concerned about the cumulative impact of fuel price increases because the Government has made decisions to increase the cost of fuel because they're putting up taxes.So my amendment inserts a new clause 3 which would see the whole regional fuel tax legislation fall out of force if at any time the average fuel price in New Zealand reaches $3 per litre or if the average fuel price in a region that has an active regional fuel tax scheme reaches $3 per litre for fuel. We are concerned on this side of the House about how much people are having to pay. We are concerned on this side of the House about the cumulative impact of tax hikes and tax increases which this Government particularly is responsible for. I know the Minister in the chair Phil Twyford if he does take a call will stand up and say we were responsible for 17c a litre in nine years but I think it's quite significant when this Government's proposing 25c a litre in a shorter period of time of only three years—17c in nine years or 25c in three years. And so it's right and proper that this committee considers the way in which this bill should proceed if at all when the price gets to a certain point.We know that the House going through the legislative process of repealing a whole piece of legislation is time consuming. Now of course the Government could take urgency again and structure bills in ways that curtail debate; that would probably speed it up. But we should have an automatic repeal clause in there and I argue that it's quite valid because to let this bill proceed without such a repeal clause is saying that the House simply trusts the Minister to make quality and proper decisions when the price of fuel gets to a certain point. I've asked multiple times if he'll do that; he refuses to comment. I've asked multiple times if he will assist the people of New Zealand who are paying his taxes—whether or not he will make decisions in the future to abandon fuel taxes. I accept that the way the legislation's drafted he would have the ability by Order in Council to recommend to the Governor-General if he felt that a certain price that people were paying for fuel was too high that the regional fuel tax scheme could be abandoned but we've had no certainty we've had no answers we've had nothing from the Minister to give us some advice around how he would see himself making decisions under the quite extensive powers actually for a regional fuel tax that are in the bill.A further reason for considering this new clause is that whilst you know fuel's around $2.20 or $2.50 hypothetically and a 10c increase might not take it close to $3 it's a very real possibility that the price of fuel could get to $3 not just because of normal market activity—normal market activity that they don't want the Commerce Commission looking at immediately; normal market activity may take it to $3 a litre—but in fact because where there are extensive powers under regulation-making powers granted through other parts of the bill where the Minister can have the regional fuel tax price at a much higher point than 10c a litre where there's no constraint on that if the Minister was to exercise his power which will be granted in this bill to increase a regional fuel tax to 25c a litre or 50c a litre hypothetically then we'd get to $3 a litre quite a lot faster. And so an automatic repeal provision in this bill would be right and just to protect New Zealanders. And I think New Zealanders do need protection from tax increases.The very purpose of a House of Representatives is to represent the people that we are sent here to serve and I think we would be letting them down if we were not to put up some arguments as to why the tax increases that the Minister wants to put in place—where I believe they have a dangerous impact on people where if the cost of fuel gets so high families around this country will be struggling to pay fuel then I believe it should be automatically repealed. I know the Government thinks that they've solved all the cost-of-living issues with the Families Package that's been referred to previously but I have to say if the Families Package proceeds but the cost of fuel gets to $3 a litre the additional impact on New Zealanders would far outweigh the potential positive benefits of their Families Package. So this would be recognition that the cost of living and the price point which people pay for petrol are very important and I ask the Government to consider this amendment. I ask them to show some humility around their plans for the regional fuel tax. I ask them to show some compassion actually for the cost of fuel to people in New Zealand.Whilst the market may be a significant dictator of how fuel prices are implemented around the country the Government does have a big part to play because we know that a significant portion of the cost of fuel right now is taxes and this legislation before us gives the Minister more power to put in place more taxes—not capped at 10c a litre but capped at whichever point the Minister so desires when he's considering his powers under regulation.I also have a number of amendments which I hope have made their way to you around changing the title of the bill and I do think that where the Government has decided that they want to in a very gung-ho fashion proceed with a regional fuel tax they take full ownership of it. One of my suggested amendments is to rename this bill the Land Transport Management (Twyford Tax) Bill". And whilst some may think that's frivolous I know that Mr Twyford the Minister in the chair is exceptionally proud of what he's doing. He's exceptionally proud of the fact that he is hiking taxes on Aucklanders and exceptionally proud of the fact that he is the one that is bringing forward legislation that lets Phil Goff off the hook with regards to his own promises around finding savings and efficiencies in the council. If Mr Twyford feels so strongly about that then I think we should do the right thing and name it after him because when a man as proud as Phil Twyford brings such legislation to the House which he thinks will be part of his future legacy where he hikes taxes on Aucklanders so that the Auckland Council doesn't have to pay for part of the cost of his future light-rail plans which I don't think are affordable or necessary then let's do the right and decent thing and name it after him. I'm sure the Hon Phil Twyford—Simeon Brown: Immortalise his name. Immortalise his name.Hon Maggie Barry: Epitaph!JAMI-LEE ROSS: —would want his name immortalised in legislation. It's not quite a statue. It's not quite a plaque at the opening of his future light-rail project. It's not quite a name on a building but it's a name on a piece of legislation—one that he's proud of one that he has so proudly shepherded through the House. And I say this is our gift to you Phil Twyford: to name this Act of Parliament after you."