Several big projects and a huge increase in spending have been unveiled in the draft Government Policy Statement (GPS) on land transport.
These projects would be partly funded by a 12 cent increase to the fuel tax, which would be gradually brought in over the next three years.
The policy statement looks 10 years into the future and envisages spending worth $70 billion over that time.
But actual costings are done for the next three years, from 2024 to 2027.
The price here is $20.8 billion, which is an increase of $5.3 billion, or 34%.
"This is the highest level of expenditure by any Government,” the Prime Minister Chris Hipkins says.
One of the biggest changes in the new GPS is a huge boost to the maintenance fund for existing infrastructure. A massive increase of 41% is proposed.
The Transport Minister David Parker says the Government needs to make up for maintenance, which levelled off when the previous National Government diverted money to its Roads of National Significance project.
He says maintenance suffered further during the Covid crisis.
Besides maintenance, the draft GPS lists a number of projects that "present an opportunity for transformational change."
It says deciding on actually funding their construction is up to Waka Kotahi, but it expects their "strategic importance will be given particular consideration" when the agency reaches its verdict.
They include a busway along Auckland's North West Motorway to replicate the one along the Northern Motorway, along with major rail projects in Auckland.
Other ideas include a series of improvements to State Highway One North of Auckland, including a road around the Brynderwyns, The existing road has been hard hit by this year's extreme weather.
Other projects identified in the GPS include making the expressway between Napier and Hastings into a four lane road. This two-lane road currently experiences a large number of crashes.
A similar idea would extend the expressway south of Cambridge to Piarere. Also on the list are improvements to State Highway One near Ashburton, and State Highway Six near Nelson.
The GPS would be funded in part by higher petrol taxes.
The increase in the first year is proposed to be split into an initial two cents increase, with another two cents six months later. This would be followed by a four-cent annual increase in 2025 and again in 2026 – a total increase of 12 cents over three years.
Road user charges would go up by an amount equivalent to the rise in petrol taxes.
The Government says it is fair enough for road users to pay for the costs of the highways they drive on.
It adds the impact of the extra excise tax would be small compared with the up-and-down movement of petrol prices which happens regularly.
In addition to higher road taxes, there would be direct transfers from the Crown to the National Land Transport Fund of $1.5 billion of capital and $900 million of operating funding. There would also be state loans to Waka Kotahi.
The programme would also benefit by about $100 million a year from dedicating money from infringements such as speed camera fines to the National Land Transport Fund.
Parker adds a range of public transport measures are important because "people accept that you cannot build your way out of traffic congestion."
“This funding targets spending where it’s needed most: reducing congestion and emissions, boosting productivity and improving the resilience of our transport network," he says.
“The significant increase in funding for land transport responds to demand across New Zealand to fix our cyclone-damaged roads, build new roads and improve public transport choices.
"This Government agrees that this investment is essential – but it has to be paid for," says Parker.
By contrast, he says the National and Act Parties have issued a "wish list" for transport projects they like, rather than developing a carefully funded programme.
79 Comments
These projects would be partly funded by a 12 cent increase to the fuel tax
Under this government, you pay taxes into a fund starting tomorrow. Meanwhile they hire expensive consultants to write reports and business cases for millions of dollars, nothing gets built and hundreds of thousands of new migrants get dumped here each year.
consultants you mean like engineers, geologists, project managers, land purchase specialists, finance managers , sorry but we sold the MOW whom used to plan projects for years ahead and had plans ready to go and now we have to go to the private sector because of idealist nonsense that it was a cheaper more efficient way of doing things
Labour is all over the place worse than the Breakfast Briefing headlines.
Yesterday we had enough spare tax revenue sloshing around that Robbo and Parker can take a hatchet to our enviably-simple GST system just to buy some votes with slightly cheaper (in the short term) fruits and vegetables.
Today the public coffers are so bare that we have to stiff the plebs not wealthy enough to afford subsidized EVs with higher fuel taxes (and, presumably, the companies that deliver the discounted fruit and veg as well).
Take the GST paid on fruit and veges and redirect it to the roading fund, cut the public out of the loop and save everyone the hassle. Also stops supermarkets from simply sucking up the GST cut for themselves.
Oh wait...the fuel tax increase will be higher than the "savings" on fruit and veges. What a conundrum.
Commuter rail in Greater Christchurch. Promised in 2017 and 2020. Not delivered and the only promises for Canterbury in 2023 are the Woodend bypass and a more reliable bridge for Ashburton. Combined cost $200 to 300 million. While Auckland and Wellington get promises of tunnels costing $billions for Wellington and tens of $billions for Auckland.
I do not understand why anyone down south would vote for one of the main political parties when they promise to spend all of NZ's infrastructure allowance for the next few decades on mega expensive tunnels in Wellington and Auckland.
This tells us there won’t be any reform of the transport funding system - no universal RUCs, no vehicle weight based fee, no changes to annual licensing fees etc… and all because heavy trucks are carving up the roads and we refuse to fully embrace rail and public transport.
It certainly signals the continuation of petrol tax, so its not looking like universal RUCs are coming.
Looks more likely there will be two sets of RUCs, the existing diesel RUCs, and a cheaper EV/PHEV RUC.
But impossible to say what they will do about weight bands, breaking the light vehicle RUCs into at least two or three weight bands makes sense, a diesel corolla shouldn't be paying the same RUCs as a Landcruiser, nor should an old Nissan leaf (1500kg) be paying the same as a Merc EQS SUV. (2800kg)
Hopefully they won't add it onto AK, who already pay an additional tax for this - though at this rate Labour can promise whatever they like - it's like watching a claymation deathmatch with the contenders competing on who can propose the worst possible policies with a straight face.
Paid for by the positive externalities - reduced pollution and increased exercise mean a healthier population, and an improved balance of payments as we stop chucking money at oil states every time we pop to the shops.
Cyclists have been ignored for decades, this is just a little catch up to reduce our chances of dying at the hands of an impatient driver.
Positive externalities are entirely reliant on the users to moving from cars to cycles.
WIth a Govt, council and wider community focusing on electric vehicles, that would appear unlikely. Further all these EVs and cyclists still require something under their wheels.So the roads will continue to need maintenance, continue to need expanding, and will continue to see more and more users.
The 8k EV rebate would have bought an awful lot of shoes and bikes for underprivilidged kids to walk/cycle. But no, we would rather keep a fat ol' stale boomer from having to raise a sweat pedalling. So health is clearly not a priority.
Further, the specific roads in question are not just commuter routes to the CBD. We are talking about the two main State Highways (45 and 3) through/around New Plymouth from the west. They are also the primary (and sometimes sole) access to the regions single Hospital and port.
I am all for healthy exercise, but adding cycle lanes does not incentivise, it merely makes those already willing and able a bit more smug.
SH45 got pretty well worked over when SH3 was closed to heavy traffic for several weeks and all the trucks went round the coast. Not sure that Waka Kotahi ever thought to bring forward any maintenance to account for that. This was during the real spike in logging trucks too.
I can't agree with your last sentence. You can't seriously suggest that the amount of cycle commuters now using the coastal walkway were already on bikes before that ever came into existence?
I wasn't referring to the coastal walkway. I am talking about the green cycle lanes added to Devon st going west out as far as Spotswood. They were put in a few years ago with the purpose of making it easier to cycle into town. But you almost never see cyclists on them... why? because they use the walkway.
They are now enhancing and protecting them by making the changes here: https://www.npdc.govt.nz/planning-our-future/projects/transport-project… and here https://www.npdc.govt.nz/planning-our-future/projects/transport-project…
Increasing cycling infrastructure does incentivise cycling - the link has been well studied. It is currently playing out in Christchurch, where ridership is well up despite the Covid set-back (no need to bike if you're working from home). Roads will obviously need less maintenance if people switch from cars to bikes.
How do you anticipate increasing healthy exercise if you don't allow people to do it safely?
I am in full agreement that the EV rebate was a terrible way to spend money and would have been better directed at bikes - even an e-bike rebate for those who commute more than 5-10km or struggle with regular bikes. Likely to be faster than driving in most situations round here and much cheaper.
Turns out I can add some numbers to this. My nearest highway traffic monitor (Brougham Street) shows an increase in traffic 2018 -> 2023 of about 4.5%. Meanwhile, the cycle counter on the bike path that runs across Brougham shows an increase in bike traffic of 55% over the same time period.
Sources:
https://maphub.nzta.govt.nz/public/?appid=31305d4c1c794c1188a87da0d3e85…
https://smartview.ccc.govt.nz/map/layers/ecocounter#/@172.62035,-43.545…
I was just getting the same conclusion.
Also worth noting is the Cycle path crosses the main road, it is not actually the State Highway.
Point is, this evidence and most other evidence in NZ shows more car trips are taken every year. Simply building cycle ways is not removing cars. It is simply placing more cyclists next to more cars so risk increases.
You're quite right, we need to keep on building bike infrastructure to keep things moving in the right direction. There's a long way to go to get to a reasonable balance.
The point is, building cycle lanes has lead to a large increase in cycling, far above the background increase in traffic. I posted this on response to a post claiming building cycle ways doesn't increase ridership.
https://ccc.govt.nz/transport/getting-around/cycling/cycling-maps
Chch already seems to have lots of bike infrastructure looking at that map, but still sod all using it going by those numbers.
Turns out it takes a while to deprogram people after a century where the answer to every transport question was 'car'. Even in Chch, the infrastructure is patchy and still being developed - in this thread you can see that some routes are still unsafe. Here are the results of the 2022 transport survey:
"Feelings of safety while biking have decreased to 37%, down from 46% in 2021. Inconsiderate and dangerous behaviour from other road users and sharing the road with cars were the main reasons respondents found it difficult to bike."
Firstly, I am all for exercise, although I prefer walking to cycling. I have lived overseas in a range of places and didn't drive until I was 30 so very much see the value in well planned vehicle alternatives. But what we are seeing here is not well thought out, integrated, strategic plans.
Take Chch - It has an entirely rebuilt CBD that has allowed for integrated planning, it has numerous alternate routes around the CBD, vastly superior bus network (when compared to NP), areas of much denser housing, and generally flat terrain.
I would also say that there is a large difference between recreational exercise vs swapping a vehicle for another form of transport. Bike lanes do not materially impact the latter, but they do have a large impact on the former.
As someone living in the city yes it does make a difference having commuter bike lanes-my primary use of those lanes is to get to work. I also use them for short trips to the supermarket etc.
however we probably need some serious public transportation upgrades to get people out of cars from rolleston etc. In Wellington if you lived that far away you would take a train- not as much choice in Christchurch
I use a bike to commute to work too. It is actually quite common in Christchurch and can make a significant impact on reducing congestion on the roads and reducing the pressure on car parking spaces because of the numbers who choose this option.
"Nationally Christchurch city is known as New Zealand's cycling city. In the 2018 census data, there were 5.6% of people whose main means of travel to work in Christchurch city was by bicycle. There were 9.1% of people whose main means of travel to education in Christchurch city was by bicycle."
The more the city invests in cycling infrastructure the higher the mode share it will achieve.
Some of the bike lanes where I am are fantastic…….but built long ago. Cycling is only really an alternative if you live within 5km of work, and don’t have kids. I have biked up to 16km each way, and while I loved it I was tired by the end of the week. I am above average fitness so for the majority of the population it’s a no go……physically, unless you can fork out the 10k for an electric bike. With labours soft on crime, reduce prison population, excuse certain ethnicities from crime policy there is no way I would let my kids walk to school.
For 7 years I cycled 7km to work in the morning, then back again in the evening. Within a year I could do the trip as fast as it previously took me to drive, park, and walk to the office, even though there was a 70km/h stretch in the middle. I was riding a $500 mountain bike at the time, and no doubt could have been quicker on a road bike. In fact, by the third year I was pacing the lycra-clad club members on carbon bikes, until I ran out of gears to go any faster. The ride home took about 3 minutes longer as it was uphill at the end.
I lost 7kg (hey look, all the 7s!) and had endless energy, enabling me to renovate several houses at the same time while holding down a desk job and working overnight sometimes too, while also supporting a sick wife and two young children. I was in my mid-30s at the time, and was never much of a sportsperson at school. Far more able-bodied people could cycle commute than they think, they just come up with excuses not to.
Why can't you bike to work if you have kids? I put both kids on the back in child seats and do the daycare and school drop off on the way into town. Hell of allot quicker than doing the same by car.
$10k for an electric bike lol. Yeah like nobody can afford a car cause it's 250K for a Rolls.
That may be fair, I don't really know NP and I'm willing to consider that some cycle schemes may be dumb even though I think in general more is better and we are well under-provisioned in this country.
On your last point - in my experience these central Chch bike lanes are predominantly used by commuters and people heading to the shops/restaurants. The cycleways further out, like along the highway SW, have a few more of the 'pensioners on a day out' crowd. The serious road bikers go on the roads.
Moron govt.
Impose EV road taxes (double the weight of ICE cars). They will need a battery dumping tax for the next decade.
Stop wasting money on EV rebates. Stop burning coal to power EVs.
Push hybrids, await hydro cars.
We are pissing in the wind when you see overseas countries road emissions....
Impose EV road taxes (double the weight of ICE cars). They will need a battery dumping tax for the next decade.
And multiple up votes. The comments section here is becoming more full of ignorant nonsense by the day. And followed up with a dose of whataboutism to boot.
My EV sedan weighs less than a Camry and far less than a Ute.
No coal burned for EVs - I charge at 11pm. And of course Huntly is about 5% of our mean electricity supply.
Hybrids - those things that run on petrol if you drive more than 10kph, or further than 50km?
And hydro cars? Hmmm, unclear - you either mean water powered which is clearly a reference to EVs being charged from our renewables grid, or hydrogen fuel cell cars which use 3x the electricity to get anywhere.
Morons and chimps indeed.
A Camry is about 70Kg lighter than a Model 3.
Who gets up in the morning and just decides to make up shit so they have something to be angry about.
I wish more people had so little else going in their lives they had to resort to outright fabrication to latch onto a sense of victimhood.
I'd start with a basic grasp of facts before I get too bogged down with calling other people morons.
Model 3 is 1611 kg and a Camry with no fuel is 1665 (1715 with fuel) according to google. That makes the Camry 104 kg heavier in real world use conditions? (Tesla is the same weight with and without electricity, but the Camry won’t move unless you put many kg of fuel in)
Allbag, Moron?
a battery electric car isn't double the weight of an ICE car.
As for wasting money, burning imported fossil fuel is very inefficient and making OPEC nations very rich and keeping us poor.
Like the idea of not burning coal but Auckland might kick up a stink around tea time. More solar and batteries would help.
Emissions is only one metric, we could be saving billions of dollars buy using our own fuel (electricity) to move around instead of OPEC oil, renewable electricity is the future.
Should have said 'daft' government policy statement on transport, not draft.
Starting to think their strategy is to appear as bad as possible this far out from the election, then drop all their ideas to win votes back, hopefully with momentum, before people realise their mistake again...
Yes , and clearly they need more , for climate related damage , and to make up for the maintenance deficit caused by National pulling funds form the general maintenance fund, to fund RONS.Its a classic case of not doing maintenance regularly , ending up costing way more in the future, (now)..most NZ roads have no subbed, if the top goes , the whole lot goes.Its costing more , but at least they are putting a decent base under the roads where they can .same with the railways, all upgrade work been designed to a 30 tonne axleload standard. i have questioned the cost now , ( given there is so much track needing upgrading, but i guess its spending money available now that won't be available with a change of government.
As the almost daily release of huge projects with their millions or billion dollar price tags continues, I am reminded of the years after the 2017 election when Labour lambasted National for uncosted promises on an almost daily basis. The circle that is formed by Labour and National is truly depressing
Taxation never finances anything that the government does of course. The government spends in its own sovereign currency and not money obtained from the private sector. What taxation does is to eliminate the money from the economy which the governments spending created and so prevents the governments spending from creating inflation and it also protects the value of the currency.
https://www.levyinstitute.org/publications/can-taxes-and-bonds-finance-…
https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/Wray_Understanding_Modern.pdf
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.