AA questions new electronic road user charges system
Fuel taxes are due to be replaced in coming years, with all vehicles coming into the scheme.
Transport Minister Chris Bishop announced this week petrol, diesel, electric and hybrid vehicles will pay for the road network based on distance travelled and the weight of vehicles.
That would mean the end of the petrol tax of about 70c per litre being paid at the pump.
AA principal policy adviser Terry Collins said basing road upkeep on vehicle weight in the nation's light fleet was flawed because heavy vehicles were the major contributor.
There was "negligible" difference between a 1200kg car and a 2000kg car in relation to the damage they did to roads, he said.
"It kind of irritates me when I hear about this weight thing on vehicles. The light fleet is not the vehicle that's causing the damage to the road, it's the trucks. You have to be about eight tonnes and then depending on your axle configuration that's when you are really starting to do damage to your roads. The light fleet subsidises the heavy industry [who] are the ones smashing up our roads and the potholes."
A fair system would need to look at who was causing road damage and who should pay the repair bills.
The government did not want to fully do this because they did not want to drive the cost of freight up as 94% of goods were delivered by truck, he said.
AA members are also seeking assurances about private companies expected to gather charges and the privacy of data being collected.
Mr Collins said car drivers wanted to know who would collect valuable data tracked electronically and how it would be used after the scheme was first introduced.
He questioned if driver movements would be used for police enforcement or road safety by the Ministry of Transport.
"Or will it be sold for somebody who wants to know how far you are travelling so they can sell you a car?"
The administration costs of private firms would include a profit margin and they could be expected to "clip the ticket", he said.
A cost breakdown for the road user charge had yet to be set, but was expected to be more than already being paid.
Yet to be announced was whether plans to raise the fuel excise duty by 22c per litre over three years from 2027 would transfer to road user charges.
Mr Collins said the government would take a hit on GST no longer being paid from 7c of tax removed for each litre of petrol bought at the pump.
Overall, the AA supports the changes in principle because of their potential to unlock other benefits.
Distance travelled was considered a better indicator of road risk than the amount of fuel being used as a basis for ACC contributions.
Car drivers pay about 6c per litre for petrol towards ACC payments.
Mr Collins said changes should also be made to motorbike registrations as motorcyclists often owned several bikes, but could only ride one at a time yet made multiple ACC contributions when not on the road.
"By going to distance based it will be a much fairer way for them to make their contribution. So, we think that would be a really good outcome. We also think warrant of fitness should be based on the distance a car travels because distance travel is a better indicator of wear and tear than the age of the vehicle."
Modern vehicles with a three year warrant could have completed 100,000km, yet a collector's car such as a 1955 Chevrolet had to be tested every year even though it might have only done 5000km a year.
Combining all the systems based on distance would be better for motorists, he said.
The AA will also watch with interest the scheme's impact on the uptake of more energy efficient vehicles.
Road users on a distance-based charge who are paying $1.60 per litre for fuel after the tax is removed may be tempted to drive larger vehicles than a Suzuki Swift because they would not cost as much to run.
tim.cronshaw@odt.co.nz
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsroom
a day ago
- Newsroom
Why planned voting changes could be a civic rights breach
Opinion: You might recall that in the 2023 election, National and Act 'lost' two seats once the special votes were counted post-election day. In other words, the special votes weighed against them. This meant that they could not form a government without NZ First. Fast-forward to July 2025. National, Act and NZ First have just passed the first reading on the Electoral Amendment Bill, a bill that will almost certainly reduce the number of special votes. Is this bill an apolitical, justified limitation on the holy grail of democratic rights – the right to vote? Or is it a power-abusing, rights-breaching, Trump-esque attempt to rig voting in their favour? Let's look at this a bit more closely. One proposed amendment is that people must enrol to vote 13 days prior to election day. If they don't, they cannot cast a valid vote. Under current law, people can enrol up to and on election day. Votes from people enrolled after 'writ day' – approximately two months before the election in 2023 – and election day are so-called special votes (together with, for example, votes cast overseas). In other words, votes from people who enrol in the 12-day period leading up to the election are special votes. In 2023, 110,000 voters registered on election day and, of the 600,000 special votes cast, 97,000 people enrolled for the first time during the voting period. These votes would be discarded under the proposed law change. Unsurprisingly, then, the Attorney-General – the Government's highest legal officer, and senior National Party member, Judith Collins – found in her report that there was a real possibility a large number of people would be caught by this new rule and, as a result, their votes wouldn't be tallied. She also noted that the highest courts of the land – here and overseas, especially Australia – have stressed 'the fundamentality of the right to vote as lying at the heart of the democratic system'. The coalition argues we need to restrict who gets to vote to avoid delays in post-election count and the formation of a new government. There just isn't the evidence to prove that this amendment is necessary to expedite a verified election result. And as Collins writes, 'While acknowledging the public importance of promoting timeliness in the counting of votes … there may be alternative measures for addressing delays in the processing of votes, which are less restrictive of the right to vote, and could therefore possibly be justified.' It is not even clear that restriction would remedy delays in counting. Those not enrolled before the cut-off can still apply for and cast a special vote. These special votes must still be processed after the election but won't be included in the ultimate vote count. Anyway, any detriment associated with any delay is – to me at least – relatively small because we have a longstanding plan b in place, in the form of caretaker governments to ensure the country keeps running while votes are tallied, checked and verified. Collins also recognises that the restriction on voting registration will effectively discriminate against Māori, Pasifika, Asian and youth voters, who are currently more likely to enrol in the 12 days ahead of the election. 'The Electoral Commission has data that indicates that special votes are more likely to come from areas with larger Māori, Asian and Pasifika communities, and that younger people are more likely to cast special votes. This may indicate that these communities will be more affected by the proposed registration deadline.' The Government had Collins' report before it passed the bill in Parliament but chose to ignore the Attorney-General's recommendations. Let's now consider the bill in the light of the current political context. At least one political poll has the National Party heading towards one term in power and it's likely that the next election will be tight. Just like in 2023, every vote could tip the balance one way or the other. Now balance the long-standing trend that special votes favour the left. As leading election law professor Andrew Geddis notes, 'Restricting same-day enrolment and voting can … be predicted to reduce the number of votes cast by groups that support left-of-centre parties.' This Government has enacted some of the most regressive laws breaching the rights of Indigenous peoples we have seen in decades. In a constitution such as ours, there are few legal barriers to it doing so. This bill is likely to disproportionately affect Māori and their right to vote, thereby making it more difficult to defend their rights. The Act Party has promoted its role as the defender of democracy and the right of one person, one vote. Leader David Seymour said in 2023 that, 'Yes, it's pretty frustrating that it's taken so long to count the votes, but let's not lose sight of the real goal here which is free and fair elections that are above any kind of suspicion. That's absolutely key no matter what the result is.' Given there is no convincing justification for the bill, as assessed by Collins, the reasoning behind it looks suspicious. It has the whiff of a calculated move by National, Act and NZ First to weigh the next election in their favour, in a way that is reminiscent of Donald Trump's advocacy for redistricting of congressional boundaries in Texas to favour the Republican Party. If that is the case, and you be the judge, then this could be a substantial breach of one of the most important of our civic rights and democratic process.
Otago Daily Times
2 days ago
- Otago Daily Times
AA questions new electronic road user charges system
The Automobile Association has poked holes at the government's new electronic road user charges scheme being based partly on vehicle weight. Fuel taxes are due to be replaced in coming years, with all vehicles coming into the scheme. Transport Minister Chris Bishop announced this week petrol, diesel, electric and hybrid vehicles will pay for the road network based on distance travelled and the weight of vehicles. That would mean the end of the petrol tax of about 70c per litre being paid at the pump. AA principal policy adviser Terry Collins said basing road upkeep on vehicle weight in the nation's light fleet was flawed because heavy vehicles were the major contributor. There was "negligible" difference between a 1200kg car and a 2000kg car in relation to the damage they did to roads, he said. "It kind of irritates me when I hear about this weight thing on vehicles. The light fleet is not the vehicle that's causing the damage to the road, it's the trucks. You have to be about eight tonnes and then depending on your axle configuration that's when you are really starting to do damage to your roads. The light fleet subsidises the heavy industry [who] are the ones smashing up our roads and the potholes." A fair system would need to look at who was causing road damage and who should pay the repair bills. The government did not want to fully do this because they did not want to drive the cost of freight up as 94% of goods were delivered by truck, he said. AA members are also seeking assurances about private companies expected to gather charges and the privacy of data being collected. Mr Collins said car drivers wanted to know who would collect valuable data tracked electronically and how it would be used after the scheme was first introduced. He questioned if driver movements would be used for police enforcement or road safety by the Ministry of Transport. "Or will it be sold for somebody who wants to know how far you are travelling so they can sell you a car?" The administration costs of private firms would include a profit margin and they could be expected to "clip the ticket", he said. A cost breakdown for the road user charge had yet to be set, but was expected to be more than already being paid. Yet to be announced was whether plans to raise the fuel excise duty by 22c per litre over three years from 2027 would transfer to road user charges. Mr Collins said the government would take a hit on GST no longer being paid from 7c of tax removed for each litre of petrol bought at the pump. Overall, the AA supports the changes in principle because of their potential to unlock other benefits. Distance travelled was considered a better indicator of road risk than the amount of fuel being used as a basis for ACC contributions. Car drivers pay about 6c per litre for petrol towards ACC payments. Mr Collins said changes should also be made to motorbike registrations as motorcyclists often owned several bikes, but could only ride one at a time yet made multiple ACC contributions when not on the road. "By going to distance based it will be a much fairer way for them to make their contribution. So, we think that would be a really good outcome. We also think warrant of fitness should be based on the distance a car travels because distance travel is a better indicator of wear and tear than the age of the vehicle." Modern vehicles with a three year warrant could have completed 100,000km, yet a collector's car such as a 1955 Chevrolet had to be tested every year even though it might have only done 5000km a year. Combining all the systems based on distance would be better for motorists, he said. The AA will also watch with interest the scheme's impact on the uptake of more energy efficient vehicles. Road users on a distance-based charge who are paying $1.60 per litre for fuel after the tax is removed may be tempted to drive larger vehicles than a Suzuki Swift because they would not cost as much to run.
RNZ News
2 days ago
- RNZ News
Making sense of the new Road User Charges
The biggest change in fifty years to how our roading network is funded was announced this week. Petrol tax is out and instead drivers will pay based on how much they travel. This change affects more than 3 million of us, so we had questions. The AA's Policy Director Martin Glynn helps explain what this announcement means. To embed this content on your own webpage, cut and paste the following: See terms of use.
