Councillors double down, email minister with Let’s Get Wellington Moving concerns

An artist impression of mass rapid transit at Post Office Square as part of Let's Get Wellington Moving. Image / Supplied

A faction of six Wellington City councillors who have lost confidence in the capital’s $7.4 billion transport plan has now written to the Transport Minister, Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency, and the regional council with their concerns.

It has also been revealed that while there is no formal review of Let’s Get Wellington Moving’s (LGWM) governance structure under way, officials are working through options for the best long-term oversight of the plan.

LGWM is a three-way partnership between the city council, regional council and Waka Kotahi. The plan includes removing cars from the Golden Mile, a second Mt Victoria tunnel, and mass rapid transit from the central city to Island Bay.

Yesterday the six councillors filed a notice of motion with the city council’s chief executive. They want the council to declare no confidence in LGWM and withdraw the council’s funding agreement.

The signatories are Tim Brown, Diane Calvert, Ray Chung, Sarah Free, Tony Randle and Nicola Young. Their concerns include the governance and accountability structure, the scope and scale of the work, and the ability to deliver on budget.

Writing on the group’s behalf this afternoon, Calvert said they had articulated what many people have been feeling for some time.

“I appreciate that you may think this is a negative story and nothing more. I need to ensure that it is not just a “story”.

“The six who have signed the notice of motion have been overwhelmed by significant support - not only from individual members of the public but also various business and membership groups.”

Calvert claimed there may be more signatures to the notice of the motion with support from some Greater Wellington Regional Council members.

“We know that Wellington is well overdue for transport investment and we look forward to continuing constructive conversations on how this may be achieved, leveraging off the work that has been completed and ensuring all partners have confirmed funding upfront,” she said.

Calvert also understood Transport Minister Michael Wood was reviewing LGWM’s governance and that despite the council being a partner in the project, elected members have not been permitted to see any recommendations.

This was after Wellington Mayor Tory Whanau sent an email to councillors yesterday saying: “The minister is currently reviewing the governance arrangements and once I have an update on that, I’ll inform you all”.

Wood clarified there was no formal review underway but as the programme moved into the delivery phase, partners were talking about what would be the best long-term oversight for the programme.

“It’s a consideration as to what the best options will be as we start to have large-scale projects that are being delivered and making sure you’ve got the right expertise feeding into the oversight.”

Wood said it’s not something that will happen in the coming month or two and he was waiting for further advice from officials.

“This is relatively common. For example, if you think about Auckland light rail, we initially had an establishment board that was in place during its early phases and then as we headed towards the detailed planning for the project we’ve established a competency-based board for that.”

Yesterday Wood said the notice of motion was a matter for the council and the mayor to manage.

Whanau has said the notice of motion will ultimately fail as the councillors do not have a majority around the table.

“While I acknowledge we live in a thriving democracy and councillors are entitled to take this action, I am confident that there’s majority support for LGWM around the council table as well as in the community at large.”

LGWM has been criticised for moving too slowly. Its construction projects to date include improvements at a few intersections, a new roundabout, and a controversial crossing at Cobham Drive.

A previous review of the programme, released in early 2021, said it was at risk of failing to deliver a cohesive package, had a detrimental culture - and was inadequately resourced.

The programme’s governance structure and leadership team got a major shake-up as a result.