National has revived a transport policy reminiscent of the "roads of national significance" initiatives between 2009 and 2017. Photo / Mark Tantrum, File
National has revived a transport policy reminiscent of the "roads of national significance" initiatives between 2009 and 2017. Photo / Mark Tantrum, File
Editorial
EDITORIAL
Elections tend to fall into “change” or “stay-the-course” lanes, but October’s looming public ballot defies easy categorisation.
There will be degrees of change and familiarity on whichever side the majority of voters pick.
National and Act would, obviously, offer a clear-out in the frontline personnelrunning the country. There’s a handful of former National ministers available and most Cabinet appointees will be familiar as opposition shadow ministers or party spokespeople. Some could be first-time MPs.
Centre-right policies would be a mix of continuity, such as in foreign affairs, and new departures from the past six years, although some of the change would involve bringing back older ideas.
A centre-left government would involve a shake-up at Cabinet level. Labour and the Greens would have a mix of people with governing experience and new blood coming through, with a number of ministers retiring. Te Pāti Māori would be a further new factor in a coalition.
Labour has policy announcements to make before early voting in October and the party needs some momentum.
Illustration / Rod Emmerson
This week, a Newshub-Reid Research poll showed National four points ahead of Labour, NZ First just under the 5 per cent threshold, and a marked gap in public trust between the two main party leaders. National’s Christopher Luxon was 8 per cent behind Labour’s Chris Hipkins as preferred prime minister and 5 per cent ahead of Act’s David Seymour.
With both prospective coalitions, there will be much to sort out in negotiations.
National’s leadership has previously suggested that a three-party centre-left grouping could be chaotic. There clearly is a divide between Hipkins’ stated view on tax reform and the smaller partner parties’ policies on it.
However, there were also slight hints of potential future friction for the centre-right this week amid speculation it could also be a trio.
Seymour ruled out working with NZ First if the minor party was to be given Cabinet positions in a National-led government.
Act also questioned comments made by Luxon on television’s Breakfast on whether a National-led government would take money from China for roading. Luxon said: “Yeah, absolutely.”
An Act statement said: “We can’t follow the lead of Pacific nations who have accepted investment from China, only to find they’re now in serious debt ... [Act’s policy] allows streamlined investment from friendly OECD countries.”
The government of Italy, the only Western member of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, said this week it is trying to get out of the 2019 agreement. China reportedly spent $258 billion bailing out countries weighed down with BRI debts between 2008 and 2021.
Transport should be an important election issue for voters focused on what the next term would bring.
However, it can’t be separated from climate change goals - with the sector making up 25 per cent of New Zealand’s carbon emissions. The current target is to reduce transport emissions by 41 per cent by 2035. Despite attention on EVs, they make up only a tiny fraction of the vehicle fleet here so far.
Transport is also part of urban planning; ties in with housing and general infrastructure; and how the country manages population and inter-city economic growth.
Both main parties agree on rebuilding roads in cyclone-hit areas such as Northland and Hawke’s Bay. The Government on Monday announced money for highway rebuilds from the climate change resilience fund. National’s transport policy included upgrades in those areas and resilience work for future storms.
Flooding from Cyclone Gabrielle isolated many Hawke's Bay communities. Photo / Warren Buckland, File
National’s policy has a heavy focus on motorway-building and the stated intent to axe light rail projects in Auckland and Wellington.
Luxon’s comments doubled down on that theme. He said his focus for Waka Kotahi is to “remove congestion”, “improving convenience for people moving around our country”. He said: “I don’t believe that the sole goal of Waka Kotahi should be about climate.”
Upgraded reliable highways would go down well in the regions where the convenience of private vehicles and the historical dominance of roads over rail make buses the main viable public option for inter-city travel.
Labour has so far said it is committed to light rail in some form as part of a range of transport approaches.
Cities here and overseas focus on a blueprint of less reliance on cars, electrification of public transport, more encouragement of different ways of getting around, more pedestrianisation of streets, and use of a lot more vegetation in city centres to cool them and soak up rain. There are ever-growing kilometres of walking and cycling tracks.
It’s progressing too slowly for at least a section of Auckland voters. Foreign cities have used congestion charges, hefty parking prices and other measures to try to change habits.
It comes down to transport efficiency and where the money goes: the pollution from trains and buses per passenger is a lot less than for vehicles. A faster, more extensive, national rail network would help climate goals whereas experts say more roads encourage more driving.
There are 70 days until New Zealand indicates which lane to take.
