Editorial: Task now to fast-forward expressway

John Banks is absolutely right about one thing: the vast majority of Aucklanders back the building of an eastern expressway. Some of the supporters are, of course, long-suffering motorists from Pakuranga and points east who foresee a slashing of their journey time to the city, and relief for clogged arterial roads. Others, however, simply recognise the huge cost to the national economy of a gridlocked Auckland. All those people, by and large, will now also approve of the favoured route unveiled for the 27km transport corridor. It sidesteps many of the social and environmental concerns associated with the alternatives. The task now, therefore, is to build the eastern expressway as quickly, and as economically, as possible.

On that basis, there need be little debate about whether there should be a 3.5km tunnel under Parnell or a bridge across Hobson Bay at the city end. For reasons that are unclear, the transport consultants chose not to make that call. Auckland City's mayor also has qualms. Mr Banks has correctly identified opponents of the expressway as "small in number and centred mainly on a few selfish, vested-interest property owners". Yet, at the same time, and quite illogically, he seems prepared to support the tunnel option as a sop to the Stop the Eastern Motorway group.

No such concession should be made. The tunnel under Parnell would add $400 million to $600 million to the cost of a project that has already ballooned alarmingly, possibly to as much as $4 billion. Additionally, it would take far longer to build than a bridge across Hobson Bay. The tunnel option may be less environmentally disruptive, but to talk of "an environmental disaster", as Stem does, is nonsensical. Hobson Bay is already disfigured by sewer and railway lines; adding a bridge would hardly amount to desecration of a virgin wilderness. Before placing self-interest first and dashing off to the Environment Court, opponents of the expressway should spare a thought for the plight of the vast majority of Aucklanders.

All, of course, will be concerned for the people whose homes must be demolished to make way for the corridor. As many as 1200 properties could be affected. These householders will be the real casualties. But at least more compassion is now being shown them than was the case with previous pronouncements on the expressway. It is only fair that they have been promised a fair market value for their properties. It is also, however, a hard fact of life that their situation must not divert attention from the absolute need for the expressway.

It is also a hard fact that all Aucklanders will have to get used to paying tolls. Everything points to the expressway being financed by a combination of taxpayer funding and a public-private partnership. This would draw heavily on a toll that is electronically collected, as is the case with similar congestion-busting highways overseas. Melbourne offers an excellent example, and an obvious path forward.

With the emphasis placed on the eastern expressway, particularly by Mr Banks, it is possible to overestimate its importance in the transport scheme of things. It is, in fact, only a part of the jigsaw that builds towards an integrated transport network - and which must have every piece in place if Auckland is ever to move freely. The expressway must be developed in tandem with a comprehensive public transport system and a completed motorway network.

Nonetheless, the Mayor of Auckland's close involvement has caused the project to become something of a litmus test. That test cannot be flunked because of the objections of a small special-interest group. There need be no placatory gesture that would cause taxpayers and ratepayers to pay over the odds. The eastern expressway must be completed as quickly as possible - and for the benefit of the vast majority of Aucklanders.