At first glance of the New Zealand Herald’s leading article today I was pretty worried, with rail electrification and integrated ticketing supposedly threatened by some fairly significant investment losses that the Regional Council (along with the rest of the world) has suffered in the past few months. Yet, as I read further, I discovered that this was actually utter rubbish. I don’t know whether it was the article’s author who chose the utterly stupid headline and completely misleading photograph, but with a bit of thought it all turns to utter nonsense.
According to the artcile, “serious doubts have also been raised over how it will pay $548 million over the next decade to help fund rail electrification, integrated ticketing and development of the Tank Farm.” Firstly, I can see how the development of Tank Farm would be affected, as it’s pretty much a development by the Ports of Auckland, whose declining fortunes and asset base (through the ARH) is the very reason the ARC is supposedly struggling to find funds. That’s not really a problem, as there’s still many years to run on many of the leases for the industrial uses that currently predominate this area. There’s also still quite a lot of planning issues to be sorted out, although that has been advanced fairly well in the past few months with District Plan changes being generally approved by the City Council and the Regional Council. It’s the other two issues that don’t make any sense: rail electrification and integrated ticketing. As Mike Lee points out in the utterly hilarious interview that seems to have occurred between him and Mr Orsman (where Mr Lee basically says there’s no reason to panic about a million times and for a million different reasons), integrated ticketing is well advanced and the ARC are totally committed to it. So no pointless scaremongering about that issue. But that’s not even my main gripe with the article.
My main gripe with the article is how it talks about electrification. The capital costs of electrification are to be half-funded by the government (the track-work) and half funded by the regional petrol tax (the new trains). So no need for ARH funds there. The article eventually realises that, but goes on to say: “money from its holding company and rates will go towards the operational costs for electrified rail.” Now why this might still be absolutely true, the hilarious thing is that electric trains have LOWER operational costs than diesel trains, due to the fact that electricity is cheaper than diesel and that there’s less wear-and-tear on the engines of electric trains than diesel trains. So, therefore the logical argument is that if we’re worried about operational costs in the longer-term (and keep in mind electric trains aren’t likely to be running before 2011 at the earliest, and possibly not until 2013 – surely long after the current recession has ended) then that makes the case for electrification even stronger than before.
So, it really does make one wonder why the Herald is scaremongering about whether electrification will still be possible. Perhaps they don’t want it to go ahead? Perhaps they are just so stupid as to not understand the benefits of electric trains? I really don’t know. But it is a pretty pathetic piece of journalism I have to say.
Processing...