Editorial: Non-decision on airbase a myopic act

Opinion

There is one major saving grace in the Government's non-decision on the future of the Whenuapai airbase. Some years down the track, when the issue must be resolved, those holding power may just recognise the overwhelming strategic imperative for retaining Whenuapai's capacity as a military airfield. Such understanding is absent in a Government which has reduced the Defence Force to what it deems to be a morally acceptable peacekeeping operation.

There is little doubt about what the Government would like to do with Whenuapai. Transforming the site into a housing estate or industrial park would have figured far more highly in its thinking than keeping it as an airbase. But it has chosen to take the easy option. Most conveniently, the Air Force, which was originally due to vacate the base by 2007, will now be there until 2010, and possibly 2014. Such grounds for declining to make a decision are untenable. The Government's approach smacks of that adopted by a succession of local councils over the region's transport needs. Every day, Aucklanders live with the consequences.

The Government's limpness extended to its "neutral" position on whether a second commercial airport for Auckland should be established at Whenuapai. Such an option would at least allow a reversion to military use if necessary. According to the Economic Development Minister, there were "no compelling national or strategic considerations to justify central Government's active involvement in establishing a commercial airport at Whenuapai". But, at the same time, said Jim Anderton, there was nothing to stop the airbase being developed in that way under a joint-use agreement with the Air Force.

That amounts to an extremely convoluted and misleading message. The Government should not be involved in a commercial airport if by that it means financially supporting the plan. An airport should not be subsidised by the taxpayer or ratepayer and nor should a commercial operator pay anything but the market rate for the site. Having said that, there are, in reality, strong national and strategic considerations that the Government should have acknowledged before endorsing such a development.

The national issues relate to Auckland's burgeoning population and the potential restraints on the expansion of Auckland International Airport's Mangere operation. The airport company says Mangere will meet the region's needs for the next 50 years. That is a bold but not totally sustainable prediction. Quite simply, nobody knows if that will be the case or, indeed, if Whenuapai would be commercially viable. What we do know is that the north and north-west of Auckland are growing strongly and that an airport at Whenuapai would be attractive for people who must struggle through increasingly congested roads to Mangere. If a commercial operator wishes to test the strength of that appeal by establishing an airport for smaller domestic airlines, it should be encouraged.

More importantly, Whenuapai must always be able to revert to Air Force use. The base should, in fact, never be closed. It is ridiculous to remove the service from the closest point to its operations in the Pacific and from the region of densest population. And it is militarily naive to place all its aircraft at one base, Ohakea.

A joint-use airfield, similar to many in the world, is the ideal solution. Many opposed to a commercial airfield have their own agendas. Auckland International Airport has spoken out against it, as has Air New Zealand, even though its custom could never have been seriously contemplated. It would be heaping folly upon folly if the Government shareholding in Air NZ played any part in its Whenuapai reckoning - the ultimate shortsightedness in this most myopic of acts. Greater sense must prevail when Whenuapai is next considered.