12. CLARE CURRAN (Labour—Dunedin South) Link to this
to the Minister of Transport
Does he stand by his statement that for New Zealand train builders “there will be lots of work for these guys, there’s no doubt about that”?
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport) Link to this
As I said in answer to an earlier question on the same quote, yes, and, in particular, the full quote, which I will abridge slightly for the Speaker: “the reality is this rail company has been treated like a Cinderella in this country for a long, long time, with all sorts of political things about what it should do and what it shouldn’t do, which don’t necessarily make commercial sense for the company itself to proceed with. And I believe strongly that if we’re going to turn KiwiRail around—and it’s a big turnaround project—then we actually have to let them make the commercial decisions that they need to make.”
Why is it a good idea to take a whole-of-economy approach to agricultural irrigation or to the making of movies such as Avatar, but not a good idea to take a whole-of-economy approach when it comes to capital purchasing and rail?
Well, we do take a whole-of-economy approach on issues of trade and investment and decisions about what organisations should do. In fact, the previous Government did as well, as we know, because it allowed the one big train contract to occur when it was in Government, which was the Matangi train contract, to be let to Korea. That was a sensible decision. Of course, Labour no longer thinks it was a sensible decision, because it is in Opposition. Therefore I suspect it is just playing politics with this issue.
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I asked a specific question about why it was not a good idea to take a whole-of-economy approach to capital purchasing and rail, and all he did was speak about the previous Government.
Mr SPEAKERNo, if I heard him correctly, he said the Government did take a whole-of-economy approach. There was no need for him to explain why he did not, because I think in his answer he said the Government did. I am prepared to refer to the Minister, if I am wrong. No, he is indicating that what I heard was correct.
How does he reconcile his statement today that KiwiRail must be able to operate without political interference, with the repeated remarks of the KiwiRail Chief Executive, Jim Quinn, that he has taken a narrow commercial approach because “that is Government policy”? Who is telling the truth?
The point I think I need to make to the member is that it is actually she who is suggesting taking a political approach, because she is suggesting that KiwiRail take a view that we do not require of any other company in this country. That is simply not appropriate. We have an organisation that is very much struggling to turn itself round. We have to give it every opportunity to succeed and to make the right commercial decisions to allow it to succeed.
If he is so keen to see New Zealand’s rail system run at a profit, can he confirm that our roads do?
I can confirm two things. Firstly, I want KiwiRail to be successful, and I would have thought that the member would want KiwiRail to be successful, as well. It is crucially important for this country that we take the very big investment that was made by the previous Government, where it overpaid for KiwiRail, and make it successful. In terms of the roads, the answer is yes, so much so that they work on a pay-as-you-go system. It would be a great and wonderful thing if other aspects of the transport system also ran on a pay-as-you-go basis, which, of course, they do not.