Land Transport Amendment Bill

I thank you, Mr Chairperson, for your guidance to members on the way we should conduct our debate. I am sure members will fairly strictly observe your injunctions.

The title is accurately described—it is a Land Transport Act that is being amended. In that discussion one has to consider why the Act was originally amended; otherwise, why would this bill have the title “Land Transport Amendment Bill”? It was amended due to circumstances about which I will not go into detail, because they have been canvassed in the previous debate. We are now having to deal with the consequential effect of the original amendment, with this amendment bill.

It is important that I put on record that National will vote for this clause. For the benefit of the Minister for Land Transport Safety I want to say why we will vote for this clause. We recognise that it is necessary to have an amendment provision. Therefore, we have to vote for a clause that reflects that the bill is an amendment; otherwise, why would we vote for this clause? We are voting for it because there is an injustice, most notably related to persons who already held taxi or bus driver licences and who were not intended to be caught by the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee’s legislation from last year. I think even Mr Brown would concede that that was the general view of the select committee last year. We are now having to make an amendment, to fix that up. I also note the comments made by the chair of the committee, who said that this situation was not entirely the fault of the committee. I guess that is true, but the House does rely on the guidance of select committee members, and the truth is that they, along with the officials, did not take quite enough care.

I think it is perfectly reasonable that the debate be focused on the amendment and the reasons for this particular title. I do not think it is necessary to be vexatious or litigious in the way we conduct this debate. I conclude by saying that National will support this particular clause because we recognise the necessity to pass legislation to deal with the circumstances of the 230 bus and taxi drivers affected by the previous amendment, who ought to have a right to apply for reconsideration.

It gives me great pleasure to follow our esteemed colleague Wayne Mapp in talking about the title of the Land Transport Amendment Bill. We find that this title has a number of problems. The biggest problem is that a Land Transport Amendment Bill was passed in 2005. It is very difficult for a novice to find this legislation. For example, we can go to the Land Transport Act 1998—get the book—but where is the 2005 amendment? We have to go right to the back of the book. Are we to have another Land Transport Amendment Bill of 2006? This really highlights that this title is not appropriate for what we need. We need a much better title to reflect this situation.

What, then, can we call the bill? We could try the “Land Transport P Endorsement Bill”, but I think P is not quite the word that we should be using at this time. It has a connotation that can be applied to criminal justice elements, so I do not think P is quite right. Would we want the “Land Transport Passenger Endorsement Bill”? That could be quite effective. It could be the “LTPE Bill”, which would be another start and could be something different as well. Then there could be the “Land Transport Passenger E Bill”.

💬 Lindsay Tisch: What does “E” stand for?

“E” meaning endorsement. We could try that. Then we could look at something quite different—at the “LTA Passenger Endorsement Bill”. We could look at the “Land Transport Amendment Passenger Endorsement Bill”, or just the “Land Transport Bill”. We could have something like the “Passenger Endorsement Bill” or just the “Endorsement Bill”.

We need something that tells us what is going on today. We cannot quite work out what is going on today. If we look at the Land Transport Amendment Bill that was passed in 2005, for example, and at what some people said about it, and if we look at the Land Transport Amendment Bill 2006, we see that there are quite contrary arguments—especially from New Zealand First, Labour, and a number of the other parties—that have moved away from the initial intention of that Act. So we cannot call it the “Land Transport Amendment Bill 2006” because people are now talking about quite a different set of circumstances.

People have moved on, so the bill’s name needs to move to reflect that change in attitude and approach. We need to find something that is more reflective of what people want and what they are saying. We cannot see that under the Land Transport Amendment Bill 2006. There could be another possibility. We could be doing the “Land Transport Amendment Bill (No 2) 2007” if we followed the approach of the Labour - New Zealand First Government, because it is looking at drawing another line in the sand. What will happen next year if we find that that line is wrong and a lot of people come to the press in the Christmas holidays next year? We will have to do it again. So we will have the “Land Transport Amendment Bill (No 2) 2007”, and we will continue showing that we cannot have lines drawn in the sand just in grey areas.

We need conclusive legislation that puts a formula for the way forward, and the amendments on the Supplementary Order Paper achieve that. We need a new bill with a new name, to reflect a new vision. That vision will be based on what people looked at last year in the Land Transport Amendment Bill 2005, and rightly passed. It is a vision that has a stricter approach to this issue than we are encountering at this stage of the game.

It is my pleasure to debate the issue of the name for this legislation, and I look forward to the options being considered in full by the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee later this year when we have to reconsider the Land Transport Amendment Bill 2006. We will find that the grey areas that have been put in by Labour and New Zealand First do not work and we will have to reconsider the name yet again.

Clause 1 agreed to.

Clause 2 Commencement