KEY POINTS:
Increased spending on rail has prompted an impressive surge in patronage by Aucklanders. Quibbles about service deficiencies aside, it is clear more and more people regard this mode of transport as a valid alternative to the car. Now, it is important the momentum is maintained. Auckland's passenger rail system must become as good as it can be as soon as possible. An integral part of this process is electrification of the network, which would see the end of the slow and unreliable reconditioned diesel trains. Government, both central and local, should be pulling out all stops to ensure nothing stands in the way of this quantum leap.
Sadly, that is not happening. Confirmation of this came late last week when Auckland Regional councillors reluctantly approved an annual transport budget with no allowance for the Auckland Regional Transport Authority to start ordering a fleet of 35 electric trains by the end of the year. This move sprang from uncertainty over the passage of the Land Transport Management Bill, which would give the council the green light to plug a funding gap for the $1 billion electrification project with a regional fuel tax.
The legislation, foreshadowed in the 2007 Budget but still awaiting its second reading in Parliament, has run into opposition from National. The party's transport spokesman, Maurice Williamson, has questioned the desirability of such a tax at a time of spiralling living costs, especially for food and petrol. He says a National government would look at other ways to pay for the project, such as infrastructure bonds or a public-private partnership. The party was committed to electrification and did not rule out regional fuel taxes as a long-term possibility, said Mr Williamson, but "right now is the worst of all timings".
This sort of thinking has reduced Auckland public transport to its present lamentable state. Quite simply, the large sums involved mean no time is the right time. Worse, National's search for options would inevitably delay electrification. The chance of having a core fleet of electric trains running by the 2011 Rugby World Cup would diminish sharply. Mr Williamson's suggestion that a National government would keep the project rolling, even if it meant having to underwrite it while it worked out the best alternative, does not seem realistic.
His party's stand is the more unfortunate in that the regional council has already taken significant steps to leaven the impact of a fuel tax. Instead of a tax of 5c a litre, it now proposes starting at 1c next winter and 2c in 2010. Given the rising price of petrol over the past few weeks, those additions would pass virtually unnoticed by most motorists.
The regional council chairman, Mike Lee, is understandably angry about the legislative uncertainty. He is right, also, to say that Aucklanders expect greater Government involvement in public transport development, if only because of what they see when they look south. Wellington, as Mr Lee notes, has a new fleet of electric trains paid for about 80 per cent by the Government, while Aucklanders make do with diesel do-ups. Still, however, National seems unmoved by his promise of "an uproar here in Auckland" if it cannot come up with funding alternatives to the legislation.
It should take notice. The imposition of a new tax is never comfortable, but the regional council is carrying the responsibility. This is also the most straightforward way of ensuring quick progress. National, which appears committed to Auckland's transport strategy, should look past its tax qualms and see the rapid development of a reliable, fast and frequent rail service. This is an option that, at a time of escalating fuel prices, many Aucklanders covet more than ever. All parties should support the Land Transport Management Bill.
