All this posturing, threats and huge budget promises re Auckland from their new councillors etc makes me shake my head in disbelief.
Akld is but one of many cities in this wonderful country and if Aucklanders think they have pre-eminent rights on all of our taxes then they need to pull their heads out from their nether-regions and get real. New Zealand does well when all New Zealanders are thriving.
Having lived in Auckland and now back in the Bay, give me Napier any day!! So yes my Auckland friends, there is life beyond the Bombays.
That’s a rather different argument than the erroneous one about gold and one that needs more than mere assertion.
simple, give us (Auckland) ALL of our petrol taxes back.
A few people have missed the point of my post… I’m all for a vibrant, thriving, strong Auckland – and infrastructure is crucial for the city to move forward. Of course I understand the value of Auckland to the domestic economy etc etc, but my point is that if any government concentrates only on Auckland at the expense of the rest of the country, then no one wins. For example, HB has had all of the $71m taken from its regional roading fund by Joyce, thus effectively putting the brakes on the much-needed infrastructural development in napier. This was money raised from excise tax paid by the people of the Bay – so are the people of Napier any less deserving than the people of Akld? No, we all deserve our fair share of economic development. To concentrate solely on Akld is a mistake. TO develop Auckland is a necessity; to ensure the economic growth the whole country is vital.
Maybe it’s time everyone else paid us back for the years of underinvestment in Auckland then?
Stuart, the thing is that Hawkes Bay’s population just isn’t growing particularly quickly. Statistics NZ’s medium estimate for 2031 shows just a 6,000 increase in population on 2006 levels. By comparison, Auckland’s population is estimated to increase by around 574,000 during the same time period.
Sure, HB deserves to keep money needed to maintain its roads and reduce safety black-spots. But in reality there just isn’t likely to be much need for more transport infrastructure there over the next 30 years. For every additional HB resident, there will be 96 new residents in Auckland.
Does that mean Auckland should get 96 times more transport funding than Hawkes Bay? No of course not. Does it mean Auckland should get say 20 times as much (even though Auckland’s population is “only” ten times that of the Hawkes Bay). Quite possibly in my opinion – particularly in terms of money spent on new transport infrastructure.
Do we now propose that spending on new schools and hospitals be “regionalised” to ensure that all areas get new health and education facilities in relation to how much tax they pay? Or wouldn’t it make more sense to build the new hospitals and schools where the demand actually is – because it would be silly for hospitals and schools in fast-growing areas to be bursting at the seams while those in other areas with stable populations were empty and under-utilised. Wouldn’t it?
What makes transport different?
Wrong question.
The question is, what makes ROADS different. Why should proposed AKL ROAD spending be scaled back.
Answer: because additional ROADS will be obsolete in 8-10 years when no one can afford to drive using $4 or $5/L petrol.
You really are a fool CV, Jarbury has done more than probably any other non-politician in Auckland to raise the issue of Peak Oil and transport funding imbalances and you are arrogant enough to pose a hypothetical question to someone who has forgot far, far, far more about transport than you will ever know…
Stuart, perhaps your point wouldnt have been missed if you had made it in a more mature way befitting a servant of all NZers.
Paul our experiences are very similar. I yhink nz is beautiful, and I dont hear aucklanders dissing the rest of the country. Also Auckland is full of people not born here but from other parts of NZ. Alienate them at your peril
Jeremy, I would actually appreciate you not being personal and rude towards me – especially in response to my comment which was very straight forward and impersonal (and not even directed at you).
I did not know Jarbury’s background because I do not follow his blog or his activities and a simple headsup would have sufficed.
And if you read my comment, I did not attack his position that AKL deserves more money for transport infrastructure as I believe it is required, I attacked the idea – and not him personally as you did me – that additional spending should be focussed on roads.
As for calling me ‘arrogant’, please remember that I am not the one who has stooped to ad hominem attacks here.
Stuart, do you think think the people of HB ever knew their roads had been getting a disproportionte amount to upkeep them and mostly from aucklands share in the past? Have you told them that when they are currently upset, you know to point out about fairness, community of NZ and swings and roundabouts. Do you think the people of HB are worried for auckland after 30 years of our share of roading going north of the bridge and south of the bombays? I doubt it. It’s your job to point these things out, unless you see your job as telling them what they want to hear and not assuaging any misunderstandings?
Aucklanders havent complained about their money going elsehwere UNTIL their own backyard reached gridlock! HB seems upset way before that point.
I apologise CV, knowing how much work Jarbury does caused me to see red…
Thanks Jarbury, some really useful information.
CV you bought into stuart r’s thinking hook line and sinker, shame on you.
Aucklanders do NOT spend their time hating or dissing the rest of the country, when historically our taxes and revenue have contributed beyond our own share… why do you think as you do about Auckland?
You boys are up too late… its 6.45am in edmonton.
I ahve now spent time in London, Dublin, Edinburgh, Helsinki, Sweden, St Petersburg, Toronot (LOVED toronto) and Edmonton (left out the much smaller pplaces). Some have similar populations to NZ and ALL have better public transport. We’re seelling ourselves short. I stupidly thought the WCR 2011 would give decent impotus to public transport measures in Auckland. I was wrong. I shudder to think about and extra 60,000 in the city in concentration. Is it just going to be smokes and mirros for 6 weeks to make it seem smoothe, or will there be a call from wellington for us all to take our annual leave and go elsewhere to ease problems?
CV, I’m probably one of the last people in the world who would be arguing for more road expenditure.
My point is that Auckland deserves a bigger chunk of the “transport pie” shall we call it. I’m sure if we got that, and the freedom to decide how to spend it, then we’d easily have Len Brown’s three rail projects built within 15-20 years like he wants.
And then jarbury could run free on the new tracks!
CV, thanks for the answer. Appreciated.
yes, have had a great time but 5 weeks is too long I start to yearn for home after about 4…
Some work some play and some daylight robbery, al part of the eclectic mix of travelling. I love it and the people and the different ways of viewing the world and themselves… and to realise how very similar we all are and how lucky kiwis are.
I missed you Tracey
It’s good to have you back 
Hey Spud. Has Rebecca returned as Susan? Susan said she liked Clark and voted for her, but like Rebecca every post she makes that alludes to the past is very derisive.
Its about the correct amount of time to recover from a brain chipping procedure, so could be.
Tracey, I don’t know, I’ll have to keep an eye out. One thing that does seem to be missing is her verbosity!
Rebecca could churn out for the olympics! 
I miss Rebecca and her laugh
Good that she’s gone though. 
Oh well, at least we still have Monty, he won’t be going anywhere
Anyone seen Loota???