Land Transport (NZTA) Legislation Amendment Bill

I move, That the Land Transport (NZTA) Legislation Amendment Bill be now read a third time.

I brought this bill to the House following the review into Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency’s (NZTA’s) regulatory capability and performance. I commissioned that review in response to a backlog of 850 regulatory non-compliance cases that, over a number of years, had not been adequately managed by the Transport Agency. One of those cases involved the tragic death of Mr William Ball. Mr Ball was killed when the car in which he was the front seat passenger lost control and crashed into a ditch near Dargaville in 2018. That vehicle, which had just received a fresh warrant of fitness only one month before, had not been properly inspected and was found to have frayed seatbelts. The inspection agent who issued the vehicle warrant had a history of non-compliance. In spite of this history, the agency had allowed this agent to continue operating and to issue warrants of fitness for several years.

In response to this regulatory failure and the tragic death of Mr Ball, I commissioned a comprehensive review into the regulatory capability and performance of the New Zealand Transport Agency. The review and the final report found that the Transport Agency had failed to properly and safely regulate the land transport sector. This failing was the result of a number of shortcomings, including a weak focus on its regulatory role and function, a lack of clear accountability for regulatory decision-making, and inadequate resourcing of the agency’s regulatory role.

Safety is this Government’s top transport priority, and I want to make sure that we are putting people and their safety first, and safety lies at the heart of this bill. To ensure this, we have prioritised changes to Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency so that it exercises its regulatory functions to promote a safe, efficient, and effective land transport system. The objective of this bill is to strengthen and clarify the Transport Agency’s regulatory function and leadership role within the land transport regulatory system. The bill seeks to achieve this by establishing a Director of Land Transport role, clarifying the role, its objectives, and the functions of the Transport Agency, and supporting key regulatory interventions.

The bill also provides a platform to give effect to the new speed management framework. This will provide for a more transparent and effective approach to the process of setting safer and more appropriate speed limits on our roads, outside our schools, and in our urban centres. It’s one of 15 actions in the initial action plan under the Road to Zero road safety strategy announced earlier this year. The changes proposed within this bill will ensure that Waka Kotahi has the tools it needs to do its job properly and to keep people safe.

I want to briefly acknowledge that, although the proposals within this bill are not law yet, Waka Kotahi has already taken a number of important steps to improve its regulatory performance. This includes the recent release of the agency’s regulatory strategy, Tū Ake, Tū Māia, which responds to the requirement in clause 9 of the bill to develop and publish a regulatory strategy. I am committed to ensuring that Waka Kotahi, and indeed every transport Crown entity, has the appropriate governance, resources, and regulatory expertise in place to deliver effective regulatory outcomes and, ultimately, to keep Kiwis safe when travelling.

Before I conclude, I would like to take the opportunity to thank those who have supported this bill through the Parliament, and contributed to the quality of the legislation. I want to acknowledge the work of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee and the submitters for their suggestions and recommendations to improve the bill. Notably, the changes proposed in this bill were prompted, in part, by the tragic death of Mr William Ball, and so I would like to acknowledge the family of Mr Ball as I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I think we’ve got to a good place on this bill, and I want to reiterate some of the comments that the Minister mentioned and particularly the sad circumstances that led to some of the provisions within this bill being put forward, particularly around that regulatory aspect and the now subsequent establishment of the director role within the land transport framework. It actually makes sense, because if you think about it, well, we have a director of the Civil Aviation Authority and also Maritime New Zealand, so having one for land transport now is an appropriate alignment across those. But it also reflects that there were some issues, there were some regulatory compliance failures, and that shouldn’t have happened. It did, and we need to make sure we address that; this bill does that. So from that perspective, we’re in a good space. We’ve landed, I think, pretty well in relation to those.

It’s also establishing a register around land transport records such as speed limits, which normalises or makes easier access to those for the public as well, which is important. One of the aspects that we do have a couple of reservations on was around the speed limit zones or setting changes—so, in particular, New Zealand Transport Agency, effectively, being able to require those road-controlling authorities to set a particular limit, as opposed to empowering them to create the limits as necessary for them. I understand the intent there is, again, to try and standardise or get consistency across those different territorial authorities to have more appropriate limits that align so you’re not having to worry about whether you’ve crossed a boundary and where that’s sitting. But the risk is—particularly, I think, in rural settings—that a type of road could be classified as needing a particular limit, which is appropriate for part of that area, but is not appropriate for many other parts. So that is a concern I do just want to note.

In urban settings, that’s probably not such an issue, because generally a particular type of road is reasonably uniform throughout that location if you’re in a town or a city. But when you get out into the countryside, those roads can be quite different and can change depending on which part of the countryside you’re in, as well. So it may be appropriate for a gravel road to continue with a speed limit of 100 kilometres an hour if it’s a flat gravel road that’s pretty straight. But then there’s plenty of other gravel roads that are quite winding, undulating, and may indeed be more appropriate to have a lower speed limit. Of course, the reality is, throughout all of this, we do rely and expect our drivers on the roads to make appropriate decisions, so we can’t regulate away responsibility. So that’s something we do need to be mindful of as well. But that is just one of the concerns that I did have and wanted to put on record around the blanket approach to that.

Having said that, I think it’s good we’re moving on. Most of those changes will come in promptly around those speed limits, etc. The director role, though, actually doesn’t come in until, I think it was, 1 April 2021. Actually, that makes sense when we think about transferring some of those functions and responsibilities; it will take a little bit of time to set up that structure, so having a bit of lead in to that is appropriate.

So, on the balance of it, I think we’ve landed in a good space, just with that one caveat—we’ll see how that plays out. Obviously, we can come back and address that in time, if necessary. But at this point, I’d just like to thank my fellow members on the Transport and Infrastructure Committee for their work in this, particularly the officials for all of the work that they did as well, and, of course, the Minister for bringing this forward, unfortunately triggered in those particular regulatory aspects by an unfortunate incident. I do want to acknowledge that man’s family, as well. Having said that, we support this bill, and I look forward to it passing through.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. This is a bill, the Land Transport (NZTA) Legislation Amendment Bill, that is all about safety. It strengthens the regulatory function of the New Zealand Transport Agency. It is a great bill and I commend it to the House.

I didn’t quite realise I’d be standing so quickly, but what a deep and meaningful contribution from the member that’s just resumed her speech, Priyanca Radhakrishnan. It’s probably one of the better Labour speeches we’ve heard over these past three years, if we’re truly honest about the situation. But let’s actually get on to the actual piece of legislation, the Land Transport (NZTA) Legislation Amendment Bill.

Broadly, let’s be very clear, we support the bill and we broadly support the provisions in it. We’ve supported the recommendations that have come from the MartinJenkins report into the regulatory practices in the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA). I would make the point for the Minister of Transport—I don’t think he was too pointed with his comments, but, you know, people could be interpreting these—that the review into the NZTA didn’t find any lack of focus on safety; in fact, they found that the people there were passionate and dedicated to road safety and our land transport system. But, none the less, there were still areas that needed improvement, in some cases quite significant improvement, and so here we are with this bill.

I just want to talk about the speed management aspects of it. I welcome the register and particularly the idea that the public will be able to know and look up what limits will apply in any given section of road that they may traverse at times, or even frequently. I’m a little bit worried, though, about—well, I appreciate that it makes it somewhat easier for road-controlling authorities, shall we say, local authorities, to manage speed management plans in their areas, areas, obviously, which they know better. What I worry a little bit about is creeping inconsistency across the country on where or on what type of road and what environment and what sort of mixed setting, what speed may or may not apply. New Zealanders do like to travel. At the moment, we want New Zealanders to travel all throughout their country, to help other regions, in domestic tourism. I think it is important that there is consistency of approach and, therefore, consistency of speeds that New Zealanders can anticipate as they travel through their own regions, but also across others.

I’d also note that the NZTA themselves are not without some blame here as well. I could give one example. I won’t take too much away from my colleague Stuart Smith, who I’m sure is going to talk about this also. But, for instance, this proposed speed reduction between Renwick and Nelson, down largely in his patch of Kaikōura. It’s one that’s very difficult to justify. In fact, he might talk about a non-scientific test that he undertook with, I believe, our transport spokesperson in the car, illustrating just how safe that road was to drive at the current limit. So what we don’t want for speed management plans—or the ability for the NZTA to overrule them—to result in is a creeping reduction in people’s ability to get around at reasonable pace—a lot of people and goods—and that they can do so safely. We don’t want to see a creeping excuse to simply reduce limits because one or two people inside a Government agency or a road-controlling authority want to believe it’s a good idea.

Where we do these things, they should be purely for reasons of safety, and they should be things that can be evidenced and accepted. Because the reality is, the NZTA with speed cameras, or police with their roving patrols, cannot patrol every motorist across New Zealand doing what speed at what time on what stretch of road. We actually need voluntary compliance. I would contend we get voluntary compliance when the motorists can see the practical connection between what they’re being asked to do and their perception of the road, the conditions at the time, and what, to their mind, is a very reasonable speed to travel at. So we need to make sure that what we make easy to do, for good reasons, doesn’t creep into the sorts of practices which might erode voluntary compliance, which we actually need to help promote safety on our roads. I commend the bill to the House.

I seek leave to clarify a detail on an answer I gave in the committee of the whole House.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I just wanted to go back to a question that the member Tim van de Molen raised on the provisions in this bill in relation to Waka Kotahi using a more directive approach in relation to using a rule in relation to speed limits. Mr van de Molen asked in what circumstances a more directive approach, as opposed to kind of an enabling approach, would be used. My answer, if I recall correctly, was that it would be used in relation to school speed zones. I just wanted to clarify, because I would hate—just for the purposes of getting it on the record, the bill itself takes an open and enabling approach. It’s the policy intent behind the bill that that more directive approach with road-controlling authorities would be used in relation to school speed zones, but the bill itself is open and permissive in relation to that. So thank you, Mr Speaker.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. On Wednesday night, I gave the longest speech I’ve ever had to this House for my valedictory note, and today I give the shortest one: I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I will indeed talk about the little scientific test that I did in my electorate. As Mr Hudson pointed out to the House, there is a plan to lower the speed limit from Renwick right through to Nelson. A significant section of that through to Havelock is quite unnecessary to have any change in the speed limit. So I invited a journalist and Chris Bishop, our transport spokesperson, to ride with me to Havelock and back. So on the return from Havelock to Renwick, I set my cruise control at 100 kilometres an hour, and I didn’t touch the break, and nor did the car slow for traffic in front of me all the way back to Renwick. So I never had to touch the breaks or take any corners—took them all very safely.

💬 Hon Tracey Martin: What are they going to lower it to?

As the Hon Tracey Martin could appreciate, I would not want to do anything dangerous with a journalist in the car. So that demonstrated the pointlessness of lowering that speed limit. In fact, further to that, I note on another section of road, through the Hunderlies, the speed limit has been lowered to 60 kilometres an hour on State Highway 1—quite unnecessarily. The local fire chief Ian Walker from Kaikōura is on the public record as saying it will make no difference and the only difference it will make is to make it more dangerous because of the risky passing behaviour. In fact, he pointed out to me, the other day, that all the serious accidents that they’ve attended on that section of road have been on 45-kilometre-an-hour corners where trucks, in particular, roll over, and they cause other serious accidents as a consequence of that.

So the speed limit of 60 kilometres an hour is not going to change that. It could be 100 kilometres an hour; it should be 100. It’s absolutely crazy to have these variable speed limits all over the place when they’re totally unnecessary. If we wanted to actually reduce the road toll as a reduction, we would reduce the speed limit to probably 10 kilometres, and it would be just absolutely crazy to do that. No one would ever think of doing it. So you follow that rationale through: 100 kilometres an hour is actually a safe speed for our roads. I think that this bill should ensure that, let’s hope at least, good sense is brought into this argument, not some crazy policy wonk that wants to impose their own views on us. Let’s hope that doesn’t—

💬 Hon Phil Twyford: That’s a slur on policy wonks!

Well, I’ve gone outside my remit on that one, Minister. But I think it’s absolutely the feeling of people out there—the motoring public—that they’re sick of these silly speed limits being imposed. The rule only works when people respect it, and they do not respect these. So bear that in mind for those people out in policy land, if they’re listening to this speech. Thank you. I recommend it.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Green Party is very pleased to support the Land Transport (NZTA) Legislation Amendment Bill. It does respond, as the Minister of Transport noted, to a regulatory failure which resulted in a tragic death; it strengthens the regulatory leadership of Waka Kotahi; it centralises the regulatory authority; and, particularly, it strengthens their role in relation to speed management and enforcement. The work that this Government is doing to improve road safety and to get the death toll down is a key part of the Government’s programme, and this bill assists that. I commend the bill.

I have to say, the Government speakers are ripping through this. If only this would also apply to some speed limits where we could get a little bit more speed going there safely. I might add, the 110 kilometres, Minister Twyford, would be fantastic on some parts of our motorway system, and certainly in Auckland—coming back there—to see it sped up a little bit more.

This is a good bill. I think it actually, in some ways, shows the system working rather proactively, if you will, in response to the MartinJenkins report. The Minister—I think, rightly—highlighted the sad catalyst. You don’t want sad events like that to have happened and death to have occurred unnecessarily, but the system begins to work that a report is done and the Government of the day takes those learnings and implements them, and from what I’m hearing, the Transport and Infrastructure Committee was working cooperatively and putting forward some very practical changes, which are important.

I think the role of the Director of Land Transport is an excellent one to actually provide that almost singular focus on to the regulatory requirements of our transport system. It will be incredibly, incredibly useful.

So I’m not actually going to take up too much time on this one—you know, I don’t want to fall behind in the speed of others. That causes congestion and problems, and people start honking horns. But I’m very pleased to commend this bill to the House.

Bill read a third time.