Editorial: At last, we get our say on port growth

Ports of Auckland strikers. Photo / Sarah Ivey

So extensive and so intrusive are the plans to extend Auckland's port that it was incumbent on the Auckland Council to provide the opportunity for public discussion. Later than should have been the case, this has been granted by a decision to undertake an extensive review of the role of the Ports of Auckland before the council decides if it will support further expansion into the Waitemata.

That is not the definitive thumbs down for the port company's aspirations that many Aucklanders would have applauded. But it means the company will not, for the moment anyway, enjoy the advantage of having its plans locked into the Auckland Plan, the 30-year blueprint for the city.

A council tick would have generated a momentum of its own. Ports of Auckland could have used it as a constant reference to underpin the expansion of its waterfront operations from 77ha to 95ha by 2055. Included in this planning are enlarged Bledisloe and Fergusson wharves which, according to drawings prepared by Heart of the City, would extend about halfway to Devonport. The harbour channel would be much narrowed and the visual appeal of what is now a spectacular entrance would be much diminished.

Understandably, these plans caused considerable public angst when publicised by the Herald. Boaties complained that their playground would become a river, seriously affecting yacht racing. But, more fundamentally, the port company's proposals brought to a head questions about the role that the port should play in Auckland's future. If it was the reason for the city's founding, it was becoming clear that this no longer bestowed a blank cheque for an expansion that would allow the port to cope with a forecast 400 per cent increase in traffic before 2055. Increasingly, Aucklanders seemed eager for a more accessible and pleasant waterfront, and for there to be fewer trucks on their roads.

The opportunity for a meaningful examination of alternatives to the port company's ambition has been enhanced by developments in the country's infrastructure over the past decade. Tauranga has become our biggest export port after a period of bitter rivalry with Auckland. There is good reason to think it will continue to thrive because of its enterprise, impressive productivity and transport links. Auckland, for its part, continues to appeal as the most logical point for imports. Ideally, the two would be operating on this basis, either through a merger or a joint venture.

Such rationalisation should reduce the need for such dramatic wharf extensions on the Waitemata. It would also suit the national interest by heightening efficiency in internal transport arrangements, thereby increasing international competitiveness. Ensuing capacity constraints would probably mean this rationalisation would need to be underpinned by the development of Whangarei's Northport as a deepwater facility, with a rail link to Auckland. As Ports of Auckland noted in December, the presence of three ports in the upper North Island would virtually eliminate any risk to the supply chain that would flow from dependence on one.

Even to fulfil this role, Auckland's port company needs more space to replace that which it has given up for public use and to cater for the next generation of bigger container ships. It is the extent of this expansion, and whether it should exceed the reclamation already consented for, that needs to be discussed. Aucklanders must decide, in many ways, whether they want to retain a harbour that is more than a port, and the implications of this for the city's growth.

We all now have the chance to have that debate.