Land Transport (NZTA) Legislation Amendment Bill

Thank you, Mr Chair. Let’s go for value over volume in questions, Minister. I’d just like—because, again, another bill I wasn’t on the committee on, or I was, actually, very briefly, in the very early stages of the select committee. So just a clarification. It’s my understanding that in effect—if not as explicit as possible, but in effect—a change in this bill will give the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) authority to require a road-controlling authority to create a speed management plan, whereas previously the law was about empowering them to be able to do so as they saw fit for their respective areas of control. Firstly, is that the case that there is, in effect, at least, the ability to require that? If that is the case, was that intentional, to make a step from empowerment to requiring? And the third part to that, as they start to get the information for the Minister in the chair, the Hon Phil Twyford, is if it does enable that requirement or requirement setting, under what circumstances is it envisaged that the NZTA might use that mandating authority?

I think, you know, road-controlling authorities, as they head into this slightly revised world, would probably like some degree of certainty as to when they might be instructed to do things that they possibly haven’t given consideration to yet or have on a work programme that might be stretching out some months or years yet to come. I’m sure they’d like the confidence and certainty that what might be empowered under the amending legislation won’t actually be forced upon them—or at least, if it is forced upon them, will be forced upon them in circumstances they can foresee and prepare for.

Thank you, Mr Chair. Now, Mr Hudson, I think, has picked up probably one of the key points here, and it’s one that I wanted to touch on as well, because, broadly, with this bill, we are in agreement with it. Setting up the new director role is an appropriate response to some of the regulatory challenges or missteps that have occurred over the last few years, and it actually more closely aligns, obviously, with what they have in the Civil Aviation Authority and Maritime New Zealand as well. So that side of it is fine. We support that.

The speed limit process changes, though, is an area that I have some concern about, and I understand the intent is to try and provide more consistency for those territorial authorities, having a national register—that’s all well and good. My concern, in particular, comes to the ability for the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) to mandate what those local road-controlling authorities set those limits at, and whether it is for certain roads being a named road or it is certain types of road. So I’ll just repeat that for the Minister: what I’m looking for is clarity around whether NZTA can require those road-controlling authorities to set speed limits for a certain type of road as opposed to a specific road, such as this road named X, Y, Z, or is it all types of road that fit within a particular criteria in that particular jurisdiction?

The reason I raise that is that particularly in rural areas—and we see this a lot in the Waikato, where I come from, a lot of those rural areas can experience quite different road settings across the areas, and what might be appropriate for a speed reduction on one road that fits a particular type may not be the same need for that same road type in a different location, based on different parameters within that geographic area. So, for example, the complexity of road conditions, whether it’s how winding it is, whether it’s a gravel road—some of those aspects in instances may be appropriate for reduction but not always. So I’m just wanting to clarify if it’s a type or is it named roads in particular.

In relation to a speed rule?

Tim van de Molen: Yes.

OK. If I could just ask the member to just give us a moment and I’ll seek advice from the officials on those very specific questions.

CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): In the meantime, is there anyone else that—with the committee’s indulgence, I think we will wait for the Minister.

Thanks for the member’s patience. So on those specific questions, the provisions in the bill allow a rule to be established that could require a road-controlling authority to set a certain speed limit, but it’s only there in relation to schools and zones around schools. Otherwise, the general enabling effect of the rule remains the same. So it’s only in relation to setting speeds at schools.

Tim van de Molen’s question about the New Zealand Transport Agency requiring either specific named roads or categories of roads within a certain area—the effect of the bill here is that in a plan that’s been consulted, it could, in fact, be certain kinds of roads, categories of roads within a certain jurisdiction, but when the plan is finalised and promulgated, then it would result in specific named roads or stretches of the roading network. I hope that answered the member’s question.

Yes, thank you for that clarity, Minister, it does. I guess that unfortunately probably doesn’t ease my concern, particularly in coming back to that rural setting, because it can often be the case where a road can change vastly. I understand that within an urban setting, having a classification of a type of road is generally pretty consistent across that urban location, but I’d suggest in rural—and I’m not saying that rural is special, although we probably are, but, you know—there is often more complexity or more varying factors, and so, yeah, perhaps trying to seek some reassurance that the local authority would be able to give some insight to add in and whether there’s then any flexibility to say, well, that classification of road in these locations will make named roads but then we might not name those other ones where it’s not appropriate. Or would it still have to then come across the whole gamut of those roads?

I think the intent of the bill is for this to be a better, more streamlined and clearer enabling mechanism so that road-controlling authorities—it’s easier for them, and if there’s a clearer process for implementing the outcome that we’re seeking here, it is a much better, more refined, and granular setting of the right speed for the right bit of road right across the network. That’s the intent, and other than the more prescriptive element, which is confined to setting speeds around school zones, it’s still, effectively, enabling, and there is a process of negotiation and consultation built into the planning process. So I hope that reassures the member.

The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 557 in the name of the Hon Phil Twyford to the proposed amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 546 in his name be agreed to.

Amendments to the amendments agreed to.

The question was put that the amendments as amended set out on Supplementary Order Paper 546 in the name of the Hon Phil Twyford be agreed to.

Amendments as amended agreed to.

Parts 1 to 4, Schedules 1 to 5, and clauses 1 and 2 as amended agreed to.

House resumed.

The Chairperson reported the Land Transport (NZTA) Legislation Amendment Bill with amendment.

Report adopted.

Third Reading