National-ACT’s determination to corporatise Auckland’s transport operation has been one of the most controversial aspects of its super city plan. They rammed it through against the advice of three government departments who argued a council-owned company would be less accountable to ratepayers than if it was run in house. The transport agency, governed by a hand-picked corporate board, will spend 54% of the super city budget and have 1000 staff.

There is no doubt getting progress on transport is top of Aucklanders’ must-do list for the super city. If it fails on this it will be judged harshly. And more specifically, it will be judged on its success or failure in ramping up public transport.

Which is why it is worrying there are early signs public transport might not be top of mind for those setting up the new transport agency.

For starters it appears the Auckland Transition Agency has overlooked the need for ongoing development of the bus system, which still carries the majority of Auckland public transport passengers.

It has specialists on urban design, storm water, cycling and walking, and several parking meter specialists. But no bus system development specialists. These are the people dedicated to the initiatives that give buses priority, from bus lanes to special signals at traffic lights, and the green patches in the middle of intersections that allow buses to queue jump.

Huge numbers of Aucklanders, especially in the outer suburbs, depend on the buses to get around the city. And the buses also feed the railway stations.

This public transport blind spot is reflected in the agency’s 306-page workforce plan which is mostly about roads. Bus stops, bus shelters, and bus priorities only get one mention each in the entire document. The words bus lane only get one mention, and that is in the context of revenue collection.

Josh Arbury over at the Auckland Transport blog has more to say on the apparent lack of focus on public transport in the new transport agency. He is also concerned about a lack of integration with urban design and land use planning, a point well made to the select committee when the bill was being considered.

The announcement of the newly appointed interm chief executive of the transport agency David Warburton gives further cause for concern. Mr Warburton does not appear to have any significant experience in urban transport.  While the ATA says he has a PhD in environmental engineering, he did his thesis  on dairy shed effluent at Massey. He was Wanganui District Council’s CEO under Michael Laws, and then led a Melbourne-based engineering firm that does very little urban transport work.

He may well be a good manager, but don’t we need leadership on urban transformation? It has been reported urban transport high fliers from Perth and London pulled out of the recruitment. Perth is the public transport success story of Australasia. They are where we would have been if we had adopted Robbie’s rapid rail 25 years ago. Perhaps the Perth candidate got wind of Steven Joyce’s roads fixation and a super city being set up by people who just don’t “get” public transport?