Editorial: ARC should keep role in transport

Auckland's local politicians are giving themselves interminable headaches about a subject which ought to be fairly simple: what sort of body should be responsible for the region's transport services.

The answer ought to be obvious because the Auckland Regional Council has just begun extracting its revenue directly from ratepayers and much of that revenue is to maintain an improved (we hope) public transport system. It would be sheer folly to set up a separate transport authority, as preferred by Auckland and North Shore councils, which would spend the money collected by the ARC. Accountability works best through direct taxation; the body that runs a public service should have to present an electorate with a bill.

A "standalone" body proposed by Auckland's city councils would not be directly elected by the public, would not have to send out its own rate demand and would not face the consequent public criticism. Meanwhile, the ARC would be collecting revenue to sustain a service whose costs it could not control. There is no question that the ARC must be accountable for the costs of Auckland's public transport and should run it.

The city councils, with some justice, doubt the competence of the regional administration when it comes to running anything. The ARC has been largely a planning agency since it was stripped of its trading operations 10 years ago and it is unaccustomed to turning strategic statements into concrete action. But that might not be wholly a bad thing.

To say the ARC should "run" the region's public transport services is not to suggest it should own them and make most of the operational decisions. Unfortunately, that is exactly what the ARC wants to do. It no longer owns the buses but it is determined to own the trains it has chosen for the upgraded rail services. It will engage a private operator - France-based Connex is the preferred tenderer - to clip the tickets but most of the operational details of the service have been specified by the council.

The Government is as anxious as Auckland local bodies to see an end to the confusion of roles and responsibilities for transport services in the most populous region. A financial package to tackle Auckland's congestion is expected from the Government next week and it wants to be assured that Auckland has the organisation to handle it.

The Government, of course, contributes to the plethora of cooks spoiling this broth. Since it raises its contribution from national taxpayers it has to keep a hand in how the money is spent. But it can be reasonably confident that so long as control is vested in an elected body that raises its own revenue, the interests of taxpayers will also be satisfied.

The third source of finance for the region's transport is the fund known as Infrastructure Auckland, which owns former ARC assets, notably the port. The quasi-independence of the fund's management seems to be resented by the Government, the ARC and the city councils alike. They should all think again.

The board of Infrastructure Auckland has annoyed the Auckland City Council by subjecting the Britomart terminal costs to close scrutiny and has antagonised the regional council by quibbling at a request to finance rolling stock. In both cases the board was acting exactly as a prudent banker would. There is no question the expense of the Britomart terminal is out of proportion to its place in the scheme of things, and there is a case for financing rolling stock through commercial leasing arrangements rather than a finite public fund.

It is in the public interest to retain Infrastructure Auckland as an additional check on ARC enthusiasms. Answerable to ratepayers and an independent fund manager, the ARC is well set up to be given prime responsibility for the projects that must restore Auckland's transport arteries to full health.