The National Party’s hatred of public transport has been exposed in the Waikato, with their Hamilton-based MPs arguing against a Hamilton City Council proposal to establish a passenger train service between Hamilton and Auckland.
Now why would local MPs argue against adding an additional service for local people, particularly when a recent survey showed 85% support from ratepayers to subsidise such a service? Very curious.
Now, before bloggers trot out the Crosby-Textor line about how much Kiwirail cost to buy back remember that we had to buy it back because the Nats sold it in the first place so it doesn’t wash as a the reason why they are so opposed a passenger transport service between Hamilton and Auckland.
Nat MP David Bennett’s contention that he doesn’t want a diesel train polluting the atmosphere doesn’t stack up given that the proposal would take 70+ cars off the road each day and that he is in the thick of fast-tracking a rule change that allows juggernaut diesel-pumping trucks on our roads that are simply not built to carry those weights.
On that issue, both Waipa District Council and Environment Waikato have voted to oppose the juggernaut rule change. Both Waipa and Waikato District Council’s noted the pressure coming from Government to stop promoting rail when they debated their positions on the rule change. You can sense how intimidated the councils were feeling by reading the Waikato Times article here.
For the record, Hamilton is our fourth-largest city and it is 120kms away from Auckland (largest city). Now where else in the developed world would you find that situation with a railway line between the two, the Government owning the railways and the train but still no passenger train service between the two?
So, who is prepared to hazard a guess on the real reason the Nats oppose rail transport.
I’d extend the service to Tauranga as well. Then we could have a fast commuter service between the major upper North island Centres.
We could pay for it through what we save on having to keep fixing SH’s 1 and 2.
If your depiction of their submissions is accurate Sue then I agree, this passenger service is sorely needed.
Um why do the Nats hate rail? Simple answer, because it has already been gorged and privatised by their mates.
And there’s not alot left to gorge, privatise or flog off.
I think the rail should come before the expressway. Make use of all the available options before wasting money on expanding roads and destroying peoples property.
30% of New Zealanders don’t have access to an automobile so these kind of services are improtant to keep people moving about
National spent a lot of time in opposition screaming corruption, but I am wondering if we aint seen nothing yet and if we are not being treated to Russian-style crony capitalism. Look at the links between Alan Gibbs, climate change crank extraordinaire, and his money and the ACT/National policy backflips on an ETS. Look at the possible tie ups between givernment members,the curiously similar research and press releases of the (secretive about it’s funding) Sensible Sentencing Trust and U.S. Private Prison companies. ( Deleted defamatory Trevor). What are his previous and/or current business and personal links with the road transport forum? From education to prisons and roads, it seems to me the National Government are the happy prisoners of a growing, George W. Bush style crony capitalism.
This service is likely to compete quite well against people driving between the two cities.
The Silver Fern trains will be able to do the run in about two hours. At the moment it (supposedly) takes about 1 hour 25 min to drive between Auckland and Hamilton. However, that assumes no congestion at all. Considering that the current proposal is to run the trains at peak hour then I think we’re going to end up with pretty comparable times. Furthermore, someone travelling on a train can work and be productive during that two hours. Perhaps if Kiwirail are smart they could install power-sockets and even WiFi on the train – that would certainly make it quite attractive!
One of the problems is finding a slot into Britomart. I think that it’s essential the train goes all the way into Britomart and doesn’t terminate at Newmarket. In fact, I would go as far to say that for it to be a success it HAS to go all the way into Britomart. The fact that we’re having trouble finding slots into Britomart should be a HUGE clue that we need to hurry up and increase Britomart’s capacity ASAP. Otherwise we have no chance of increasing Auckland’s rail system’s capacity.
To answer Sue’s question – why do National hate rail? I really don’t know. David Bennett seems to have built his political career on getting the $2 billion Waikato Expressway built – even though for one thousandth of that cost a rail service would help ease congestion on SH1. Perhaps he’s worried it would be too successful and the justification for spending billions on his pet project would fall away? Perhaps he knows that with significantly higher oil prices just around the corner, he needs to get the Waikato Expressway built now, or it just won’t happen as people will wake up to the fact that it’s insane to spend billions on motorways people can’t afford to drive along.
Deleted off topic – warning Trevor
Surely if the service is so brilliant, then the demand will be there that it wont need to be subsidised and/or people would want to pay the extra amount.
Arent there any buses riding between the two cities? I take it if it operates you would be travelling via the two cities by it ?
rjs131 – the benefits of getting people off the road are significant enough for the subsidy to be worth it. A study was undertaken last year that showed a pretty good return on investment.
And regarding buses, they just aren’t suitable for daily commuting really. The inferior ride quality compared to a train is significant.
rjs131,
I have been regularly travelling for work from Wgtn->Palmerston North and back. My preference is the train as I can get two billable hours of work done on each trip in comfort with hot drinks and good food just a minute or two away.
The bus is a complete write off for me, I can’t work on the bus. Not only would trying make me throw up, but it’s far bumpier and lurchier and there’s no room to work and none of the handy layout things (like tables and power points).
It’s not just the Auckland Hamilton rail proposal, it’s the failure of this government to recognise the disproportionate contribution transport makes toward New Zealand’s carbon footprint. To the contrary the minister for the RTF and his officials declare that ‘the primary driver for achieving economic growth and productivity will be the increased level of funding for State Highways’ even while they acknowledge that even without more motorways the country’s ‘transport accounts for 42 per cent of the greenhouse gas emissions from energy use’ (the OECD average is around 30 per cent). And don’t come out with that oft-repeated but equally often deunked falsehood that more motorways will increase fuel consumption efficiencies. One can only assume that either the Ministry of Transport is staffed with troglodytes or that there’s something distinctly fishy going on. This needs clarification.
I agree Commuter, the government’s approach to transport has been utterly reckless and stuck in 1960s mentality.
Although that said, Labour were barely any better and only got around to really supporting public transport in the last year or two of their term. The fact that Auckland’s trains aren’t yet electrified should be an embarrassment to the last Labour government.
Perhaps the Nats can see the folly of such a suggestion.
Lets say I wanted to visit my Mum and Dad – who happen to live in Hamilton.
I can get to their place door to door in 1.55 in comfort with my car.
If I was to do this on the bus – first I need to get to the city ($10.80) each on Maxx – then the cost of the tickets to Hamilton – bringing the total cost (off the website today) of $259.20 for 4 people return – and that is no including the cost of getting from the station to their house – add another $20 each way for a taxi.
So on top of costing a lot more money – it takes me considerably longer as well.
The train wont be much cheaper. Most people have the cost (of time and money) to get to the stations at either end – and at the end of the day its less comfort.
Now – a quick show of hands – who would voluntary pay more and take longer on a regular basis to do this …..
Bikerkiwi – problem with your argument is that the service is being designed for commuters or people making business trips, not your suggestion at all.
Furthermore, where the heck do you live that would require a $10.80 one way trip into town?
jarbury
a lot of commuters dont live in the CBD – so they have to travel in to the bus station.
A lot of commuters dont live in walking distance of Britomart – thus need to get additional transport at that end also.
As someone who has commuted (a lot) – I know I go with the comfort, and quickest options – in both the car.
Further more … the $10.80 is for return transport from Albany to CBD (thats $43.20) for us to go into town on public transport – about 15mins drive eachway
Bikerkiwi, the service is set up for people who live in Hamilton and work in Auckland.
The Hamilton station is located outside their CBD at Frankton – a place where it would be easy enough to drive to.
So, the comparison:
1) To drive – drive from Hamilton to Auckland at peak hour, time taken around 1 hour 50 min perhaps? Then park in the city, costing around $15 a day. Petrol for return trip – maybe around $20 cost. No chance to do anything productive while driving.
2) Train – drive from home to Frankton station (or catch bus). Get on train, do two hours of work while on train – no need to pay for parking in Auckland. Cost is $24 each way. Time taken for trip is around two hours each way.
Geez I’d rather take the train.
Isn’t “Blog Worls” an interesting place? I somehow imagined bikerkiwi would be heading on down the highway on his Harley or perhaps an eco-friendly scooter or lycra-clad on a bike. I never imagined the family car, but of course biker kiwi you are right. When taking the family down to Htown on an excursion outside of rush-hours traffic you may choose to take the car.
The point of the the passenger train service from Hamilton to Auckland is that it is designed to be a commuter service aimed at getting those one-passenger cars of the road that typify rush-hours traffic.
…still haven’t heard the credible reason why the Nats hate rail so much but I think Tom and Jarbury have come closest to the real reasons.
The reason the Nats hate rail is because the Road Transport Forum – the trucking lobby group led by Tony Friedlander, the ex-National minister – paid them at least $30,000 in political donations to hate it.
Transport Minster Steven Joyce is simply the Road Transport Forum’s glove-puppet.
Geez, I like trains too, but I don’t expect anyone else should be forcibly made to pay for any portion of my privilege, or my transport needs if I happen to live away from where I work. Like some other fella said earlier, “if it’s a viable option, why does it need a subsidy”?
Whether the Blue Socialists hate rail or not isn’t really the question; the fundamental questions should be: 1. “Why do the Red Socialists love to spend other people’s money”? 2. Why do the Red Socialists prefer force to persuasion”?
Sue – Funny the pics that people get in their minds.
For the record – I would never been seen dean in Lycra. In fact I believe that any grown man looks ridiculous in lycra unless they have a body that only .05% of the population is so lucky to have (mallard – sorry you dont cut it – not even close).
I dont own anything ‘eco-friendly’. Especially not a eco-friendly scooter.
@Hooligan –
According to the Ministry of Transport, car users pay 68% of their direct costs, and trucks pay 54%. There is a huge subsidy going from general tax revenues to roading – which the Nats will do everything in their power to increase.
I don’t think it’s just the RTF influencing Joyce although, obviously, they have significant clout. It seems that there’s a significant anti-rail push within the Ministry of Transport. These are the officials who allegedly advised Joyce that plans to upgrade the Auckland train network were ‘an ongoing technical and fiscal risk to the government’. The existence of such a group, presumably within the senior ranks of the ministry, is a real worry, particularly given that responsibility for rail procurement has been transferred from the Treasury to the MoT as of 1 July.
Clarke, your probably right, the Blue Socialists are no better, doesn’t mean it’s right. It was said by someone before that 85% of those surveyed voters of Hamilton City are happy to subsidise the trains; well test it out then, give all ratepayers their rates back and set up an independent trust to administer it, see how many people contribute to the subsidy, that will determine who really likes the idea. At least this way the other 15% of the poor sods get to keep their money and spend it on stuff they want.
@Commuter -
You may be right, although the fact that Joyce re-directed $1 billion of expenditures into the roading network within a few weeks of getting his feet under the table does look awfully suspicious.
And in my experience officials follow the direction of the government of the day. If Joyce has told MoT to come up with justifications for his 1960s-era policies, then that’s what they’ll do.
@Hooligan -
Sounds fine to me. And while we’re at it, we should implement per-kilometre road user charging adjusted for vehicle size, emissions and consumption, so the dork who wants to drive his Hummer down to the corner dairy to save the effort of walking gets to pay the full cost of his choices.
Its not rail that they hate. Its the idea that its them who have to pay for it. I don’t think the gnats would mind if it were done as a private enterprise.. what they don’t understand is that utilities such as public transport are SO important (for hundreds of reasons) that when the market won’t provide it, the government has a responsibility to.
@ Clarke
I’m certainly not denying the impact of Joyce’s agenda and, of course, officials follow the direction of the government of the day. However, some – particularly members of that strange body known as roading engineers – may be more enthusiastic about implementing the general policy direction than might otherwise be considered wise. The name John Whitehead sort of resonates here.
Abe. “Hundreds”?!?!?
Even more worrying is that as well as being a Hamilton MP going against improving services to Hamilton, David Bennett is also the Chair of Parliament’s Transport Select Committee!!
Good on the Nats for putting someone up to Chair that committee, who is living in the dark ages.
Sue have you considered that Mr Bennett’s victory in the last election is an endorsement of his views towards public transport, or is that irrelevant? If he is in the dark ages, why did he win so comfortably?
I’m sorry Ms Moroney, but your cheap crack at National over “crosby textor lines” sounds like a crosby textor line.
Your justfication for Labour buying back kiwirail (because National sold it!) isn’t actually a reason for paying twice its value when Toll were keen to divest.
David Bennett MP, Hamilton West, has not considered all aspects of a
Hamilton to Auckland Rail Service.
These railcars contrary to his assertions will produce emissions equivalent to 10 cars,
but remove 70 to 90 cars from the road.
When he advocates electric cars he completely ignores those that will be
unable to afford them and those who cannot drive.
He overlooks the availability of the train’s on board refreshment facilities
that eliminate stops that car commuters inevitably make.
He fails to grasp that trains permit business commuters to start and finish
their working day while commuting, saving up to four hours otherwise lost.
He doesn’t know that while cars will manage an average speed of 50 kph for
the journey, the present railcars can easily manage 60 kph average with five
stops.
In 50 years time he claims electric cars will be the most efficient
transport, but seems unaware that our narrow gauge rail, with a fraction of
the investment his government is making in parallel roads, can reach 160 kph
for passenger and freight trains, something road transport will never
achieve. City centre to centre it will out perform air travel.
Does he know the Palmerston North-Wellington train is now operating without
a subsidy? The Waikato train can achieve this too with local support.
Tim,
If it looks like a line it’s not a C|T line.
I know many right-wingers who are big supporters of rail, so I am not sure why National hate it so much.
I think perhaps it’s because subsidies for public transport are more obvious that subsidies for road users. We seem to forget that half the cost of local roads is paid for through general rates – how’s that for a significant subsidy? Or the fact that minimum parking requirements force us to use up valuable land as carparking – another huge subsidy that encourages car-use.
I think the bigger question is why is National spending $10.7 billion on new state highways over the next decade when oil prices are set to spike and we have a pressing need to reduce our CO2 emissions from transport. David Bennett might have a fundamentalist belief in electric cars being our saviour, but that ignores how expensive they are (and will continue to be) and also longer term issues relating to the scarcity of lithium for batteries.
Sue, to give you a straigh up answer about why National hate rail, I would say it’s because they’ve never used it. Most National MPs are either from rural/provincial areas or from richer parts of the large cities. Rural/provincial areas haven’t had rail for decades, while there is no rail on the North Shore of Auckland or out in the far eastern part of the city. Even in places where there is rail, I would say that National MPs avoid it because they’ve probably worked jobs where a car and carpark was provided. If you drive on the motorway every day and never use the rail network, or public transport, of course you’re not going to give a crap about it.
When Steven Joyce first became minister of transport we heard that he took a ride on the Northern Busway. He commented that he was surprisingly impressed, as he hadn’t been on public transport for “decades”. So yeah, that’s my answer. They hate it because they never use it and therefore don’t see what the benefits would be of investing in rail. They only see it as a drain on funds.
Jarbury,
Oddly enough I’ve seen Steven Joyce at the Palmerston North airport, I’ve never seen him on the train. True of MPs in general: often at airports, never on long distance trains.
Oddly enough I’ve never seen Steven Joyce at the Palmerston North airport or on the train.
I never saw Labour or the Green MP’s on the Overlander during the Mt Albert by-election, however I regularly saw Russell Norman at the Ak airport though
Patrick,
I’ve seen Norman on Wellington buses as well as at Wellington and Palmerston North airports, also never on the train.
@ Patrick
The Overlander is primarily a tourist service not an intercity service and at 9 hours for 600 km is, most regretably, hardly a convenient or appropriate mode of transport for an active parliamentarian.
Another reason to build rail to Auckland airport. Imagine the MPs taxi fares we’d save???? Probably pay for itself in a few years. LOL.
More seriously, I think the fact that politicians rarely, if ever, use public transport has a huge effect on how it tends to be neglected.
Thats right Commuter, and the very point I’m making in response to previous comments
I can’t speak for all MPs, but I have used both buses and trains for my “job” over the past few years, and I have used it because it has been convenient and I could get my work done more efficiently – not as a stunt to be “seen” at particular stations. (I don’t think my memory would be reliable enough if I was to go back to 2005 when I was elected).
I have used the Wellington/Masterton train twice to attend conferences there and I have taken the bus from Auckland to Hamilton on a few occasions, as well as the Huntly/Hamilton bus as recently as three weeks ago.
The problem with the Auckland /Hamilton bus is that it too gets caught up in congestion and so its departure and arrival times are unreliable and the trip can sometimes take 2.5 hours or more.
But the train….now, that would be my preferred mode of transport from Hamilton to Auckland if there was one to catch in the morning.
For an MP to use public transport would show their desire to meet with the people and understand. Sadly enough, this is only done on one off occasions where MPs are campaigning and not on a regular enough basis. If Key or Geoff got on a bus to go to parliament every day, imagine the amount of people they would meet as well as save tax payers.
I can understand why an MP cannot use the Overlander as it will waste a day of their time, but cannot see the harm in using a bus or train every now and again.
Nationals relationship with RTF and AA is far to powerful to move money away from Roads for a Rail service. That would cost the country 1 passing lane a year for SH67
Just to restate a point I made up-thread, I commute on the Overlander, it is a more efficient use of my time than any other way of getting between Wgtn and PN as I work almost the entire trip.
The Overlander costs $5 more a trip compared to the capital connection for the same service, so it puts me off using the service when I want to travel to Wellington.
I’m not sure who made the comment that the Wellington to Palmy service runs without a subsidy? Well this inconvenient service which only runs once a day means that people have to go to the railway station at 6am in the morning. The Waiararapa Railway service run by Greater Wellington is far better at 6 return trains a day and is a better service to follow as it serves the people.
I think if National knew they could offer a service where people could relax and do some work while they are on the move, maybe their view towards such a rail service would be different?
Another official Nat excuse for opposing the Hamilton to Auckland passenger train service was offered by the Minister Steven Joyce in Parliament today.
He said the biggest stumbling block for the proposal getting his support was that he can’t see how it would ease congestion.
What! The business case developed for the proposal says that it would take at least 70 cars off the road in peak traffic every day and he can’t see how that would ease congestion?
Perhaps he doesn’t realise that commuters from Hamilton to Auckland generally arrive on the Southern Motorway in Auckland at about 7.30-8.30am, the same time everyone else is trying to head into the city.
The Minister of Transport should try travelling some of these routes and maybe then he would get to grips with his portfolio.
Sue, I’m glad to hear that at least one politician (yourself) uses public transport. I must say the one thing that stood out to me in the current “expenses issues” was that for almost all MPs spending on taxis and rental cars was higher than on accommodation.
That seems quite amazing to me, and also shows huge potential for money to be saved by MPs using public transport more often. I realise a lot of that amount would be spent on getting to and from airports – hence my comment above about rail to Auckland airport!
Ideally we should have two Silver Fern trains zipping back and forth between Auckland and Hamilton all day long. Basically you’d have trains leaving Hamilton at 6.00am, 8.30am, 11am , 3pm, 5.30pm and 8.pm. Trains could leave Auckland at about the same times.
Most of the cost for operating this service is the fixed cost of the trains and an access fee to the tracks. So the only marginal cost of additional services are staffing and fuel. Therefore, 6 trains each way isn’t necessarily that outrageous – and would certainly provide a good service for those wanting to use the link for business trips or for recreational purposes.
Regarding Joyce’s comment, I actually think National are worried that this proposal might actually be too successful. Imagine if people realised you could do something about congestion other than building more roads? It makes you wonder if the Nats have ever heard about “induced demand”.
David Bennett MP, Hamilton West, has not considered all aspects of a
Hamilton to Auckland Rail Service.
These railcars contrary to his assertions will produce emissions equivalent to 10 cars,
but remove 70 to 90 cars from the road.
When he advocates electric cars he completely ignores those that will be
unable to afford them and those who cannot drive.
He overlooks the availability of the train’s on board refreshment facilities
that eliminate stops that car commuters inevitably make.
He fails to grasp that trains permit business commuters to start and finish
their working day while commuting, saving up to four hours otherwise lost.
He doesn’t know that while cars will manage an average speed of 50 kph for
the journey, the present railcars can easily manage 60 kph average with five
stops.
In 50 years time he claims electric cars will be the most efficient
transport, but seems unaware that our narrow gauge rail, with a fraction of
the investment his government is making in parallel roads, can reach 160 kph
for passenger and freight trains, something road transport will never
achieve. City centre to centre it will out perform air travel.
Does he know the Palmerston North-Wellington train is now operating without
a subsidy? The Waikato train can achieve this too with local support.
It never occurred to me that there wasn’t a regular train service
betwixt AKl and Ham.
That there isn’t is just plain madness
Why does it take 2 hours?
How much investment compared to highway building, would it cost for a HIgh speed train link? you know like in civilised countries?
when government gets into bed with big business it is called fascism.david bennett is lacking in commonsense when he ridicules rail.