Martin Gummer: Partnership approach needed to get Auckland moving

Opinion

Now, more than ever, we need to ask - what will be the future of Auckland's transport development?

Will it be more ad hocery, delays, uncertainty and political argy-bargy between and among central and local/ regional government? Or can we get a well-planned programme, strategically geared to Auckland's needs, properly funded and implemented on time and on budget?

We need a new approach - one that is more pragmatic, cohesive and results-driven. Once it becomes a Super City Auckland can - and needs to - become party to an institutionalised transport partnership between it and central Government.

The current transport set-up places priority on transparency and consistency in national funding allocation, and centralisation of rail and state highway operations. But it results in elements of the system working to different rules and mandates, rather than being focused on delivering overall results in the quickest time and lowest cost. This is not serving Auckland well, and has to change.

Auckland's challenge has also outgrown a conventional, project-based funding allocation model's ability to cope. The region needs to complete a once-in-50+ years' step change in its strategic infrastructure development.

The new partnership must be real in form and substance. Auckland and Wellington will need to agree on, and each be bound by, an ambitious rolling 10-year programme founded on clear, hard-edged strategic goals.

Common goals must be set, top skills pooled to agree on the best strategies and project sequences, targeted consultation undertaken.

A combination of funding sources and tools, including tolls, shadow tolls and equipment supplier funding, will be needed. And pre-agreed sharing of costs and risks will also be needed. Most critically, all parties must be bound in a united implementation effort. There is plenty of evidence to show the model that works for transport is institutionalised collaboration. It worked for developing Auckland's passenger rail business plan back in 2003, for implementing the North Shore Busway project and for project managing the Northern Gateway to completion.

Consolidating Auckland local government into one entity will help, but will not be a sufficient solution by itself. A partnership model is needed to bridge the dysfunctional Auckland/ Wellington divide that has slowed down or stymied too many critical Auckland transport projects.

Institutionalised collaboration aligns all participants around agreeing on and achieving the desired outcomes, rather than playing to their own rules.

It shortens timelines, drives results and reduces costs. It encourages innovation and a "can-do" problem-solving style. Isn't that what Auckland needs?

We need look no further than rail electrification in Auckland for a case study of what has gone wrong - and what the real causes were. During the 1990s, Auckland politicians and bureaucrats peddled various pet rail projects (e.g. light rail, heavy rail upgrade, new diesel trains) - all of which were different from each other, and none of which were founded on sufficient technical, operational or financial analysis. Meanwhile, the passenger rail system decayed badly through neglect.

Then, in 2003, the three key regional agencies of the time produced - in the space of four short months, with the assistance of the Boston Consulting Group - a robust, rigorous business plan for development of Auckland passenger rail. The plan was outcome-focused, strategic, supported by all Auckland political bodies and called - for the first time - for electrification. It also set out a timeline for its implementation over the next six years (i.e. by now).

The plan's development was a breakthrough. But, six years on, most of it hasn't happened or even barely started. And now there are even more delays. We will not have electric trains by the Rugby World Cup in 2011 - but we could, and should, have.

So why won't we? Despite there being a Minister for Auckland, senior Wellington politicians and bureaucrats didn't trust Auckland, wanted to second-guess its plans, and then basically used divide and rule tactics to wrest control back to themselves. Finally, after many further reports and some paralysis by analysis, the then Labour Government decided to support rail electrification - but only after a completely unnecessary delay of four years.

Too often, public administration does not factor in the costs and impacts of delays.

For rail, these include capital cost increases outstripping declining regional funding resources and an increased passenger safety risk with near obsolete, 40- to 50-year-old trains; and increased road congestion.

Who has been held to account for that? No one.

So, finally, there must also be greater transparency and shared accountability. Publish and publicise Auckland's future transport programme widely, in terms we can understand. And publish progress against plan, at least annually.

Accountability and transparency should help drive performance at all levels. And we, the citizens of Auckland, have a right to know what is being - or not being - done.

The Super City will be a step-change improvement for Auckland. But to deliver its full potential, it must be complemented by other bold reforms - such as the transport partnership advocated.

* Martin Gummer was chief executive of Transfund NZ from 1997 to 2002, and chief executive of ARTNL (the Auckland Regional Transport Network Ltd) from 2002 - 2004.