Private vehicles account for more than 90 per cent of the travel on Auckland's roads. Photo / Michael Craig
Private vehicles account for more than 90 per cent of the travel on Auckland's roads. Photo / Michael Craig
OPINION
Only the policy geeks among us would have noticed it.
Buried in the fine print of Auckland Council's recently released Transport Emissions Reduction Pathway (Terp) was a recommendation that illustrates so much of what the Auckland business community feels is wrong with the current approach to meeting our transportemissions targets.
In an effort to reduce reliance on cars and encourage people to walk, cycle and use public transport, the Terp calls on Waka Kotahi and Auckland Transport to "remove travel time criteria from design standards and business cases".
That's to say: getting from A to B more quickly would no longer be a factor in decisions on transport projects, the focus instead going on priorities like safety, resilience, choice and, of course, emissions reduction.
Make no mistake: this would have serious ramifications.
Private vehicles account for over 90 per cent of the travel on Auckland's roads. The proportions will remain similar into the future. Giving up on efforts to make sure those vehicles can move efficiently will strike a blow to the city's productivity and liveability.
Whether it's driving home from work, getting goods to customers, getting to Saturday sports, or getting out of the city on holiday, travel times are typically what Auckland households and businesses care about most in transport terms. Yet the message here is that the transport programme - which Aucklanders will have to pay for through fuel tax and rates - will ignore it.
From our perspective, this speaks to an inability on the part of Auckland Council to grasp the social and economic impacts of what is being proposed in the Terp, and to a vision of societal change that is simply unrealistic.
If Auckland Council and the Government are to shift the dial on transport emissions, they have to come up with a much more sophisticated approach.
Simon Bridges. Photo / Andrew Warner
Here are three principles that we believe they must be guided by.
Firstly, an evidence base. Alarmingly, the Terp's authors appear to have spent no time reflecting on whether or not their plans can actually be implemented. They describe the Terp's function as providing "a picture of what needs to be true in 2030 to achieve the target; it is not an assessment of whether it is feasible to deliver the mix of programmes that would lead to the required transformation".
This is a massive and complex problem, requiring massive upheaval and sacrifice. We need to address it through evidence-based solutions, not statements about aspiration and hope. When ideas are put forward without robust supporting analysis and transparent information about benefits and costs, they do little to advance the discussion; arguably, they hold it back, by sending a message to the public that there's nothing of substance to engage with.
Secondly, targeted action. Action on transport emissions must be urgent, but it must also be targeted. That means being practical and hard-headed, and focusing our limited resources on the areas that will yield the greatest benefit in terms of emissions reduction.
Without doubt, given the predominant role of cars and trucks in the transport system, the greatest opportunity for progress lies with decarbonisation of the vehicle fleet. This must be prioritised ahead of efforts to get Aucklanders out of their cars.
It also means understanding that you can't simply "pull every lever", which is how the Government describes its approach. Some levers should never be touched; others, if pulled the wrong way, will end up doing more harm than good. For instance, en masse conversion of road space into bus and bike lanes is sure to lead to more congestion - more congestion, of course, means more emissions.
And thirdly, social and economic sustainability. The emissions reduction roadmap must be reasonable and realistic in terms of its impact on the prosperity and wellbeing of Aucklanders, otherwise it will fail to secure lasting public buy-in.
The costs of initiatives need to be properly understood, and transparently communicated to the public, from the outset. Where proposals seem certain to come at too great a cost to households and the wider economy - such as new road charges Auckland Council and the Government are considering, over and above congestion pricing, in order to discourage car use - let's not waste time putting them forward.
• Simon Bridges is CEO of the Auckland Business Chamber and Chair of the Auckland Business Forum, a group of business organisations formed to advocate for greater urgency around the planning and delivery of the Auckland transport programme. He is a former Transport Minister and Associate Minister of Climate Change Issues.
