Unfortunately we have run out of these great posters already. Considering a reprint but in the interim you can go to here to download or even donate to help print some more.

Support Labour’s campaign here.

To get one thing out of the way straight up, no one is saying the Government is to blame for the Rena hitting the reef. I am also sure that John Key, Steven Joyce and Nick Smith are as disturbed as I am by the images of the oil on beaches and the death and injury of wildlife. Every New Zealander will want to see the damage from the accident mitigated and the environment cleaned up. What is a legitimate question though is whether faced with the incident the government showed the leadership that we should expect of them and acted as swiftly and effectively as they should have.

My take is that the government were flat footed and to keen to sheet blame and responsibility elsewhere rather than take the leadership role we want our government to take in times of crisis. Someone I worked with once said that people mostly want the government out of their way when things are going well, but they want them there yesterday when things go wrong. I think National got that wrong in the first few days of the Rena incident.

And criticism of this is not just coming from Labour, but also from people who might normally be described as friends of the government like John Roughan, Paul Holmes and even Matthew Hooten. Here is part of Hooten’s NBR column which is not on-line. (h/t Liberation)

Joyce failed totally to comprehend what the Rena grounding meant to the Bay of Plenty’, and ‘He did not see that, as transport minister and arguably the most powerful figure in the government after Mr Key, his role was to lead and improve the quality of the response, and ensure it was sufficiently empowered and resourced. When he spoke publicly, he demonstrated little empathy with locals, telling them there was no point going to the beach to clean up the oil, saying more was on its way and that it could take years to resolve anyway

Then there is the question of whether the government had done the work over the last three years to have us planned for a disaster like this. There are questions here too, with the freeze on funding for Maritime NZ and the failure to put in place the mechanism that would see more of the costs of dealing with the disaster fall on the ship company and less on you and me.

So, in the face of this disaster, we join with all New Zealanders in wanting to protect our beautiful coastline and all those, human and animal who inhabit it. But we also take our role seriously to raise the question- Where was the leadership?, and in this case it was sadly lacking.

Courier drivers are struggling to earn a living wage, with incomes stalled at about the same level as they were 20 years ago, while running costs have exploded. Urgent Couriers’ managing director Steve Bonnici said prices had been slashed due to cut-throat competition, which only intensified during the economic downturn of the past few years. Bonnici said prices have been cut to “ridiculous levels” – and it wasn’t just small, fly-by-night operators doing the cutting. As contractors, drivers had few of the benefits of employees, yet they were still obliged to wear a corporate uniform, work certain hours, apply for annual leave, and work exclusively for one company – as well as providing their own vehicles.

I’ve been on about this for some time now, including calling for SafeRates and better protections for all drivers. My Minimum Wage and Remuneration Bill, which would have provided at least minimum wage protection to these contractors was voted down early in the term of the National Government.

The National government, despite claiming it is the party for small business, has ignored the problems for small business operators like those in the Courier Industry.

“Anecdotal evidence from couriers looking for work indicates some firms are paying less than the minimum wage of $13 an hour. That’s not enough to live on, especially for drivers with families and mortgages”, Bonnici said……

“It’s sad what’s happened to our industry; there are plenty of owner-drivers out there whose revenue before expenses is barely the minimum hourly wage. After they have paid costs out of this revenue they are below the poverty line,” said Paul Holdom, who developed CourierPost Urgent for NZ Post and is now sales manager at Inter City Urgent.

The  industry is now coming around to the view that regulation might work better so that there is protection for small business operators who are totally dependent on one firm for their income.

“Every other industry has the minimum wage. You can’t put an ad in the paper offering employment at $7.50 an hour”, Bonnici says.

I’ve had a lot of contact with courier and other drivers over the last three years. Some of their stories are shocking.

Another piece in today’s SST  gives an insight into what Labour’s policy will include when it is announced on the 18th October.

Karl Anderson, First Union’s representative for transport and logistics in the Northern Region, said legislative protection was coming in Australia and it was the union’s desire to see it here too.

“I don’t think we have a bolter’s show under a Key government, which is ironic, given they say they are the saviours of small businesspeople,” he said.

Sadly, he’s right.

Two examples from this weekend. The first and most transparent being the transport debacle that David has already posted on. On Friday Murray McCully was full of confidence about the state of Auckland transport, and seemed to be taking some ownership of what he saw as a success waiting to happen. It of course did not turn out that way.

Now of course this is not all the Government’s problem. The successful running of infrastructure for RWC was always going to be a matter for both local and central government to manage. Len Brown fronted on Saturday morning and apologised. All we have seen from Murray McCully, the Minister for the Rugby World Cup is comment on how bad things were and that they should be better. Why have a Minister for the Rugby World Cup if you are not going to play your part in making things work, and in taking some responsibility when they don’t?

The more subtle version of this tactic came from John Key in response to the reluctance of insurance companies to pay out for Christchurch homeowners to rebuild. Mr Key is quoted in the Press as saying he was “bothered” by the stance that the companies were taking. Is he auditioning for Catherine Tate or something? If you are bothered you are the one in a position to do something about it. For god’s sake man you are the Prime Minister not some talkback radio caller. Do something.

There are other examples, like the PM saying National could do better in terms of the number of women on on the National Party list. I know, why doesn’t he talk to someone who could show some leadership on this, like the Leader of the National Party?

The Prime Minister and his Ministers are not interested spectators in how our country runs, they are the people who have their hands on the levers of power. They should be held to account for what they do, not just that they have had something to say on the matters of the day.

But a world class event being held with a third world train system lies at the heart of the problem. When can Aucklanders finally see a world class transport system like other cities of our size? Not with the rear-visionary Steven Joyce in charge.

Other than adding a few more electric trains to the current order, there have been no new rail initiatives announced by this government – except for pouring a bucket of cold water on the Coucil’s inner city link. Without it we can’t expand the system including running trains to the airport – something that Aucklanders see as a top priority and a symbol of us joining other smart cities – because the network will not run frequently enough without a link.

So hopefully Saturday’s failings – in the midst of a great, great opening – will get Joyce out of his yesterday’s thinking and support the Council rather than white-anting its plans.

One small curiosity from the night.  On Tuesday morning on Firstline on TV3 Rachel Smalley asks the Prime Minister at the end of her interview (relevant bit at 4.35) where he will be for the opening game of the Rugby World Cup, and will he be there “beer in hand”.  Key says he will be there, laughing saying maybe not beer in hand, “although maybe I will, I don’t have to make any speeches that night.”

Except he did of course.  Now that Opening Ceremony must have been set for months and months beforehand so surely he would have known, and Mr Key was quite definite he was not speaking.  Odd. Perhaps it was an on the night decision, which seems extraordinarily casual for such a major and important event, but it might explain what was a pretty ordinary effort (not even a Kia Ora?) from the PM in front of a TV audience of millions.

Couple of stand out issues. Almost everyone has noted the difficulty they have had engaging with Steven Joyce on issues. Anyone who has observed his response to any suggestion of alternatives to roading projects will not be surprised by that. But secondly, so much of what is being discussed here is about providing people with genuine choice when the government is instead focused on entrenching the use of cars, and ignoring that it is becoming less and less affordable (not to mention the environmental, urban design, and quality of life issues.) Case in point- the CBD rail link!

And a final word to one group in particular- Rob George from the campaign for better transport in Hamilton is who driving a huge campaign for Waikato trains. Hard slog, but you wouldn’t find a more passionate campaigner. Now he just needs some political will behind him…..

One of the highlights was a presentation by Australian transport expert Dr Paul Mees who you can hear interviewed on National Radio. Mees debunks the myth that Auckland is such a low density sprawl that public transport can never be economic, and argues that its linear geography makes it ideal for rail.

There was some good debate between transport activists who had come from around the country, and people like Lawrence Yule (mayor of Hastings Napier and president of Local Government NZ) and Stephen Selwood of the Council for Infrastructure Development.  Also excellent were Chris Harris, who has done pioneering work telling the story of Auckland’s 60 years of motorway madness, and Julie Anne Genter who has shown the enormous land resource our car dependent city invests in parking.

Standing in for Shane Jones our transport spokesperson, I spoke for Labour. The forum showed there is a gulf between National’s obsession with the Roads of National Party Significance, and the centre-left’s plan for a more sustainable, more diversified, and more economically prudent transport system.

I argued the sharp end of the debate is happening in Auckland where the Government has set out to sink the city rail link promoted by Mayor Len Brown and the Auckland Council.

60 years of motorway madness in Auckland has made living in the city’s far flung car-dependent suburbs less liveable than it should be. Where I live in west Auckland there are many people who spend an hour and a half commuting to work morning and evening. It is not uncommon for it to take 20-30 minutes to make the mile-long journey from home to motorway on ramp.

There is a widespread transport poverty. People lose thousands of dollars out of their household budgets because there is no real alternative to running a car to get to work. And up to 10 hours a week sitting in traffic: time that could be spent with the kids, playing sport, going fishing, getting an education. I don’t need to tell you it is the poorest members of our society who suffer these things the worst.

This is a direct result of a stubborn insistence over six decades on building Auckland around motorways. The current scrap between Aucklanders and this Government over the Rail Link, and competing visions for the city – sprawl v compact city, public transport v more motorways – is a fight for the soul of our largest city.  The outcome will have huge implications for generations to come.

(full speech below)

If you want to hear more about this issue come along to ‘Keeping Auckland’s Transport on Track’, 6.30pm 25 August, at Trades Hall, 149 Gt North Rd, Grey Lynn.  Speakers include Mike Lee, chair of the Auckland Council Transport Committee, Cameron Pitches from the Campaign for Better Transport, Wayne Butson of the RMTU, and me.

Phil Twyford
Labour spokesperson on Local Government,  and Auckland Issues
Opening remarks to Smart Transport forum hosted by Labour and the Green Party, Parliament, 19 August 2011

Tena koutou e hoa ma. Haere mai ki tenei hui.
I want to welcome you all to Parliament.
I want to pass on apologies from the Hon Shane Jones our Transport Spokesperson who as one of our senior M?ori MPs has been called away to an event at Turangawaewae.
But I’m happy to be here. As Labour’s Auckland Issues spokesperson I’m very aware that transport is top of the to-do list for our nation’s largest city.
Transport is vital in so many ways: to our international competitiveness, to sustainability, to social justice, to building cities that work.
I want to thank Gareth Hughes and the Greens for the initiative and work they’ve put into this event. It is very timely.
I think you’ll see over the next two days that in the area of transport the Labour and the Greens have a vision for the future of New Zealand, that stands in stark contrast to the approach of the National Government.
I believe New Zealanders are ready for change, and together we can deliver it.

When it comes to transport, it is time for a paradigm shift.
We must equip our transport system for the shape of the 21st century economy.
It is essential we protect the nation against the challenges of peak oil and climate change.
And in our largest cities, we have to shift gear seriously invest in public transport with the same determination that politicians have applied to motorways for the past 60 years.
Unfortunately, in the face of these challenges, the current Government has regressed to a caricature of a roads-obsessed Think Big approach – that was portrayed so well by the Dominion Post’s cartoonist Malcolm Walker a few days ago.
But the obsession is not just with roads, it is with certain roads. Roads of National Party Significance.
The RoNS exhibit much of what is wrong with National’s thinking on transport.
They have the look of pet projects, hand-picked.
They cannot possibly have the inferred big effect on the national economy as on every route they are proposed there are already at least one, and sometimes several, unobstructed existing routes. These roads are gold plated duplicates. Regardless of the claims their impacts can only be marginal.
The age of ever more highway building is over. Money is not limitless.
The time has come to upgrade and maintain the assets we have, and not expand our dependency on uncertain and increasingly expense imported oil.
Labour will undertake a smarter and more transformational policy with a shift to public transit investments in the cities, maintenance and upgrade of roads in the regions, and targeted investments in rail and coastal shipping.
The country needs a vision for transport infrastructure that supports economic growth by increasing productivity.
This is essential if we expect our export-led economy to provide the jobs and wage increases as we recover from the recession.
If we want a prosperous society it must be underpinned with high quality, fit for purpose infrastructure.
It must be funded in such a way that multiple beneficiaries spread across many generations share the load.
The key choices cannot be delegated to the whims of traffic engineers.
Or the needs of the local MP to ensure his mates can get to their baches in double quick time.
One of the problems with the current Government’s approach is that it looks very much like it has been captured by powerful interest groups.
There has been a narrowing of the definition of stakeholders to include only the commercial beneficiaries.
I’m sorry but sub-contractors and transport companies are not the “clients” of the Ministry of Transport and NZTA.
It is time for a tougher more rigorous approach to defining the national interest, and what is in the long term interests of the people of New Zealand.
All transport modes should be looked at equally – not starting from a position that only one mode can be good for the economy or the quality of our lives.
Instead of the RONS we need Infrastructure of National Significance – IONS.  Positive IONS.
Government should listen, not only to the new elected leadership of Auckland about its transport plan, but also the regions.
Local councils are finding it very tough right now with cuts to the subsidy for local roads. That funding is being hoovered up to pay for the RONS.
Labour would listen to the regions, and be guided by their aspirations for development, while keeping a strategic overview.
It seems to have escaped the Minister, but cycling and walking are transport too – they are not just recreation options.
You see this in NZTA’s insistence on charging cyclists and walkers on the Auckland harbour bridge while the Government enthusiastically subsidises bankers on gardening leave lazily pedalling along ripped up rail lines built by the sweat of our forebears.
Labour will make a serious commitment to rail and coastal shipping.
Apart from wanting to close regional rail lines National has not come up with a single new idea to support rail since it came to office.
With the rising cost of petrol and the threat of climate change, New Zealanders know we have to think smarter. We have to keep our options open and use more efficient transport modes, where freight doesn’t spend hours in a log-jam on the motorway.
Our rail network is still struggling with the legacy of its botched privatisation, and decades of under-investment. It is time to turn this around.
The last Labour Government had an integrated policy of spreading increasing freight volumes across road, rail and coastal shipping.
National is pumping billions into the RONS in the hope they will cope with the projected doubling of freight volumes by 2030. That is quite a gamble.
Labour’s approach will be geared towards getting the best out of our existing assets by cleverly investing in improvements that unlock hidden value.
Equipping KiwiRail and coastal shipping to carry more freight is one example.
Another is the Auckland City Rail Link which will unlock a doubling of the system’s current capacity.
Another is the smarter intermediate option of improving the Puhoi-Wellsford highway which at a cost of $300 m will improve safety and travel times, instead of sinking a billion dollars into Steven Joyce’s gold plated option.
In the face of the challenges of peak oil and climate change. Given the opportunity to unlock the hidden value of existing assets. And the utility of a more balanced approach across the different transport modes, the Government’s obsession with motorways and particularly with the RONS looks more and more like a blundering and unsophisticated waste.
We can do better.
Finally, I want to say that it is time we properly recognised that our decisions on transport infrastructure shape our communities, and have a major effect on our happiness and quality of life.
60 years of motorway madness in Auckland has made living in the city’s far flung car-dependent suburbs less liveable than it should be.
Where I live in west Auckland there are many people who spend an hour and a half commuting to work morning and evening. It is not uncommon for it to take 20-30 minutes to make the mile-long journey from home to motorway on ramp.
There is a widespread transport poverty. People lose thousands of dollars out of their household budgets because there is no real alternative to running a car to get to work.
And up to 10 hours a week sitting in traffic: time that could be spent with the kids, playing sport, going fishing, getting an education.
I don’t need to tell you it is the poorest members of our society who suffer these things the worst.
This is a direct result of a stubborn insistence over six decades on building Auckland around motorways.
The current scrap between Aucklanders and this Government over the Rail Link, and competing visions for the city – sprawl v compact city, public transport v more motorways – is a fight for the soul of our largest city.
The outcome will have huge implications for generations to come.

We need a smarter, more diversified, more sustainable, fairer and more affordable transport policy that offers more choice for the movement of people and goods, more protection against the threats of peak oil and climate change.
And a better transport system for a better way of life.
In short we need a policy designed for this century, not the last one.
end