16

Labour hates the provinces

by Whaleoil on October 31, 2011

As predicted Labour and Len Brown have done a sneaky and furtive deal so Len can buy a trainset:

Labour would scrap the so-called “holiday highway” to fund the Auckland city rail link.

Announcing the party’s transport policy today, Labour leader Phil Goff said it would cancel the $1.69 billion Puhoi to Wellsford highway and dedicate $1.2b from the Land Transport Fund to the city rail link.

That funding would cover half the $2.4b cost of the rail link, with the other half to be funded by Auckland Council.

Nice one boys. With that one policy launch Labour has committed Aucklanders to massive rates rises, tolls and congestion pricing and decided to focus on passenger transport rather than clearing bottlenecks in the road transport network north of the bridge.

With Whangarei and Marsden point set to expand as the only viable deep water port near Auckland, Labour has condemned growth int he North at the expense of about 5% of Aucklanders who take the train.

Labour likes to call the Puhoi to Wellsford extension the “holiday highway”. Way to go on winning over provincial voters.

For the record, Wellsford, Whangarei, the Ports of Northland, the Bay of Islands and the Far North are important sectors for NZ. Likewise, the North of Auckland is an important growth area, if not the fastest growth area in NZs biggest city. Giving a superior connection to the Northern provinces of NZ and our biggest city and their growth areas strikes me as a good idea.

But then, such a policy wouldn’t make Jacinda Ardern electorally competitive in Auckland Central. (You may recall she stood in rural Waikato in 2008, or nowhere as Labour call it.)

No wonder that there isn’t a red seat north of the bridge.

Tagged: • • • •

Related posts

  • Jimmy

    Dang, this might slow urban sprawl all the way to Whangarei and reduce the number of commuters traveling into the CBD!  The horror!

  • Gazzaw

    You are absolutely right Cam, the flippant description of the extension as a ‘holiday highway’ has been made purely to give the impression that it is to be built to allow Auckland ‘rich pricks’ quicker access to their multi million dollar beach villas at Omaha & Mangawhai. The truth is of course that with the absence of an effective rail system the extension is a vital transportation enhancement if Northland’s rural economy is to expand. The ultimate design must allow for the extension to continue right through to Marsden Point.

  • Scott

    I thought the time saving was only about 5 minutes, and capacity was only an issue during holiday periods, (and even then SH16 flows freely). Realistically I doubt a 5 minute time saving for the drive to auckland will transform north-lands economy.

    The business case for the Puhoi to Wellsford was reviewed by independent consultants SAHA, They found the BCR to be 0.4. by comparison the vic park tunnel’s BCR was 5.3.

    See this report (page 33): http://transportblog.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/saha-assessment.pdf

    Ive only ever voted national, but in this case I can’t understand their reasoning. That BCR looks really dubious. The terrain combined with challenging Geo-tech make this road extremely expensive to build. I don’t see why national doesn’t take the low hanging fruit first when it comes to transport.

    As for marsdon point I think it is really short sighted to expand this port without a heavy rail link. Its cost pales in comparison to the above highway (Iink was costed at $80m).

    • In Vino Veritas

      Yup, quite correct Scott, but there is also the conclusion: “NZTA now must consider the issues associated with accelerating the RoN’s which, while retaining a BCR outcome greater than one, may not be the optimal investment and funding outcome when considered in it’s broadest context against other roading projects andor other government portfolio areas”.

      ie: a BCR of greater than one, may not in all cases be the best option in terms of priority.

      • Ghostwhowalksnz

        Are you mad.  Ranking by BCR is the only way of weeding out the useless.

        If it was say 4.5  and there may be some excuse to proceed instead of only doing BCr of 5.0
        But the difference is so huge that the only reason is political.

    • Bea (from Northland)

      Its not just about time savings, its about making journey times reliable and about opening up access from the North.  

      With regard to the Marsden Point rail-link – before that can attract funding from investors, a certain amount of tonnage needs to go through the port.  Projections can’t be made of that without the road being sorted out.

      Northport has potential – its a natural deep-water port and its the closest port to international markets.  At the moment everything to do with oil comes in through that port and meat, fruit etc and wood products go out.  Northland’s mature pine estate has a special quality of being a high-density product by the way.  Going down to Auckland are fuel products, timber products, portland cement, winstone aggregates, fertiliser etc. Northland is where kiwifruit, citrus and avocado are grown on a commercial basis.

      One potential for the country is to rationalise ports.  Auckland could focus more on the tourist ships and containers for the local market and Aucklanders could have more of their waterfront back.  The cars and bulk goods and noise could come in up North.  This would mean Auckland wouldn’t have to dredge its harbour as often if at all.

      I find Labour’s Auckland-centric view of the road and of Northland frankly offensive.  Whaleoil’s title for his post is spot-on.

  • Scott

    I thought the time saving was only about 5 minutes, and capacity was only an issue during holiday periods, (and even then SH16 flows freely). Realistically I doubt a 5 minute time saving for the drive to auckland will transform north-lands economy.

    The business case for the Puhoi to Wellsford was reviewed by independent consultants SAHA, They found the BCR to be 0.4. by comparison the vic park tunnel’s BCR was 5.3.

    See this report (page 33): http://transportblog.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/saha-assessment.pdf

    Ive only ever voted national, but in this case I can’t understand their reasoning. That BCR looks really dubious. The terrain combined with challenging Geo-tech make this road extremely expensive to build. I don’t see why national doesn’t take the low hanging fruit first when it comes to transport.

    As for marsdon point I think it is really short sighted to expand this port without a heavy rail link. Its cost pales in comparison to the above highway (Iink was costed at $80m).

  • In Vino Veritas

    A rail ring in central auckland. When a big chunk aucklanders have limited access to rail full stop. (see if you can find a railway station near say, Dannemora, or Howick). This is just criminal lunacy.

  • In Vino Veritas

    A rail ring in central auckland. When a big chunk aucklanders have limited access to rail full stop. (see if you can find a railway station near say, Dannemora, or Howick). This is just criminal lunacy.

    • Scott

      Your right, East auckland is pretty shocking when it comes to transport. No motorways or rapid transport links such as bus-ways or rail lines. In the medium term a reconfiguration of eastern buses could mean passengers are dropped off at Panmure train station rather than taking the bus the whole way into the city. This transfer would save commuters  20+ minutes. Currently Peak trains are too full to handle so many passengers so the buses battle the traffic into the city. The Rail link would double the train frequency into the city meaning that wait times could be as low as 5minutes, and there would be space for the extra people.

  • Gazzaw

    Even if you are handy to rail unless you can walk to a railway station you are stuffed. Try getting a car park Mon-Fri near Remuera, Greenlane or Ellerslie railway stations.

  • Gazzaw

    Even if you are handy to rail unless you can walk to a railway station you are stuffed. Try getting a car park Mon-Fri near Remuera, Greenlane or Ellerslie railway stations.

  • frosty

    Who gives a shit about a little inner city rail loop – nobody will use it, quicker to walk and cheaper.  Seriously, by the time you get underground and wait for the next train to come through, you could have walked at least half of Queen St.  Or if the trains are as frequent and reliable as our existing service, you probably could do Queen St half a dozen times.  
    If money is to be spent on trains, it should be used to help get people into the CBD in the first place!  Half the reason the CBD is a shithole is it’s a pain to get to so nobody goes there, and without people it has become the shithole it is.  Do the rail to the airport – no brainer – and rail east.  Extend the tram from it’s ‘tour of nowhere’ loop, past britomart and along the waterfront to connect Parnell and Mission Bay.  
    Sort the ferries out (or lack of) would be better.  Frequent services from the CBD to more centers from Beachlands through to Whangaparaoa would open up living / commuting options.  If building rail and roads is so difficult buy some boats!  

    • Ghostwhowalksnz

      Wrong. The rail loop is esential for getting more people to use existing lines, its called a loop for a reason
      Wrong , dont do rail to airport, the car parks are too big to compete with. Even in Sydney and Brisbane the rail loops are underused

  • Anonymous

    An inner city rail loop is a waste of time and money. Better spent on a harbour tunnel.

    • Scott

      With rush hour (7-9am) traffic volumes declining across the bridge, and plenty of spare capacity for extra buses on the bus-way I don’t see see the hurry for a harbor tunnel.

      We are about to get some more capacity across the bridge due to the Vic park tunnel (that is quite a bottleneck I have heard).

      In addition if you think the city rail tunnel is a poor use of money, search out the business case for an additional harbor crossing, and cringe when you read the benefit to cost ratios of the bridge/tunnel options.