Govt hampering debate on heavy trucks, say activists

Critics say the move to allow truck loads to be increased will take freight away from rail. Photo / Supplied

Pro-rail campaigners say the Government is seeking public support for heavier trucks without producing evidence of economic benefits to justify the extra wear on the country's roads.

The Campaign for Better Transport in Auckland says submissions due by Friday on a draft rule change allowing truck loads to be increased to 53 tonnes or more have been hampered by the Ministry of Transport's refusal to provide a report on claimed productivity benefits from Canterbury road trials.

Transport Minister Steven Joyce said last month in announcing the proposed change that the trials and other research indicated productivity gains of 10 per cent to 20 per cent, offering a potential annual increase in gross domestic product of $250 million to $500 million.

That compared with an estimated $85 million to $100 million needed to strengthen bridges and roads to reap the full benefits of a system of issuing permits from early next year to allow heavier or longer vehicles on certain routes assessed as being able to cope with them.

Mr Joyce said trip numbers would reduce by 16 per cent and fuel use by 20 per cent, and that the trials had shown a decrease in total vehicle emissions.

But the Auckland campaigners are annoyed the ministry has refused to provide them with a report on the trials to assist with the preparation of submissions, on the basis that it contains commercially sensitive information gained from freight and trucking firms.

A ministry spokeswoman also refused to provide the Herald with the report yesterday, although she said an application by the newspaper for it under the Official Information Act would be considered.

The campaign submission argues that larger trucks will attract more freight away from rail, which they say United States studies have found uses 12 times less energy than road haulage for each tonne carried.

"It is bizarre for Government to subsidise trucking and undermine a railway business that is actually owned by the Government," the submission says.

"If the minister is truly concerned about reducing the fuel consumption of shifting freight around then greater efforts could be made to increase the utilisation of the rail network."

Campaign spokesman Jon Reeves said an allowance in the rule change for the Transport Agency to approve loads of 53 tonnes or more meant trucks "could be huge Australian road trains".

Mr Joyce said last night that the efficiency of both road and rail needed to be improved and denied that the Government planned to subsidise one freight mode at the expense of another.

Road carriers would be expected to pay for any extra wear and tear caused by heavier permitted loads.

The minister said the Transport Agency was already able to issue permits for over-size loads, and the main focus of the rule change was to allow road controlling authorities to issue permits under controlled conditions for loads of up to 53 tonnes, compared with 44 tonnes now.

"I'm certainly not looking to let 60 or 70 tonnes on the road - that's not the point."

He said there was no intention to increase the width or height of trucks, although the change would allow their length to be extended by two metres to 22m, to cater for the dimensions of shipping containers.

A Road Transport Forum official said Australian road trains could reach a maximum length of 53.5m.

Automobile Association motoring affairs manager Mike Noon said that although his organisation supported greater efficiency for freight movements, it was keen to ensure the costs would be borne fully by the operators and councils would be reimbursed for wear on local roads.

It would also push for extra training for drivers of heavier loads, which it wanted to carry special markings to alert other road users.

Senior association analyst Mark Stockdale said he had discovered an oversight in the proposed rule change, as no allowance had been made to tighten brake-testing requirements before a vehicle received a six-monthly certificate of fitness.

Transport Agency spokesman Andy Knackstedt said it was not aware of an oversight "but we will follow this up with the AA to ensure any concerns are addressed".