Herald Editorial on Auckland Transport

It’s fairly rare that the NZ Herald dedicates an editorial to transport matters, but they have done so today – raising the very same issue which I blogged about recently: the secrecy of Auckland Transport.

I shall go through it bit by bit, as I think there are a number of things that deserve comment.

Editorial: Keep planning visible for city transport

It is hard to think of a local Auckland issue that commands more public interest than transport. You only have to look at the final piece of legislation to set up the Super City to see just how significant it is.

This bill envisages seven council agencies – known officially as council controlled organisations – to carry out particular functions. By far the biggest of them will be Auckland Transport, which is expected to spend about $1.5 billion a year, more than half the Super City’s budget.

Unlike the present agency, the Auckland Regional Transport Authority, the new body will not be responsible for public transport alone, it will also take charge of roading from local councils. Thus it will oversee everything from the big picture to the small details of where to put footpaths and bus stops.

It’s pretty important to note exactly how big and important this CCO will be. Apparently its spending will take up around 54% of the Super City’s spending, if current trends continue. It will include ARTA, the transport departments of the seven city or district councils, and also aspects of the remaining bits of the ARC’s transport department. The only transport matters likely to remain with the Auckland Council will be very high level strategic planning, the transport parts of the Spatial Plan etc. etc.

On the face of it, the idea of having one body co-ordinating the approach to all forms of transport in the city looks like a good thing. Unfortunately, there is a significant downside. As a council controlled organisation, Auckland Transport will not be obliged to hold public meetings or issue agendas and minutes except when making bylaws. Effectively, therefore, many of the decisions about things that directly affect ratepayers at a local level will be made in secrecy by remote officials.

It is true that Auckland Transport will be subject to the Official Information Act, meaning that people will be able to find out why and how decisions were made, but only after the event and therefore too late to influence the decision. It will be like opening the stable door after the horse has bolted.

I was certainly originally attracted to the idea of having one body co-ordinating transport matters, and in principle I still am. However, as I have detailed previously, this could be accomplished within the existing Auckland Council – and the details of the Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill – seem to try a bit too hard to ensure Auckland Transport is independent of Auckland Council. Which makes me suspicious about Auckland Transport’s accountability. The “secrecy issue” is the last straw in this respect.

Not surprisingly local body politicians have been sharply critical. “What are the issues councillors are most contacted about? It is roads, public transport, cycleways, speed limits,” said Waitakere Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse

“It is possible that decisions on major projects, such as the Waterview tunnel or proposed motorways through Onehunga, will be made by shadowy Government lackeys without any consultation with local people.”

Local Government Minister Rodney Hide defends the arrangement by pointing out that under the Local Government Act 2002, council controlled organisations – such as Auckland Transport’s predecessor, ARTA – do not have to hold public meetings. And he argues that the provision for Auckland Transport to open its doors when making bylaws will give the public more access than they have now.

ARTA are actually pretty good at publishing their monthly business reports, which detail patronage data, how capital works are progressing and other interesting information. I’m not sure whether they are required to do this by law, but I certainly wouldn’t think of ARTA as a super-secret organisation like how Auckland Transport will be.

But this is only part of the story. Auckland Transport will also be taking over the roading functions of local councils. As roading matters are routinely placed on agendas for public information and discussion now, the bill as it stands will seriously erode the public’s right to know.

It is equally difficult to reconcile statements by Transport Minister Steven Joyce with the contents of the bill. He says the approach was designed to ensure transparency, which has to be balanced against the administrative burden of publishing agendas and minutes.

On the contrary, it is clear the approach was to ensure obscurity rather than transparency. And the “administrative burden” of publishing agendas hardly seems a sufficient reason for keeping citizens in the dark about decisions being made that affect their lives and their neighbourhoods.

Yes it’s a bit of a long bow to draw that the only justification for this secrecy is to save the “administrative burden”. Using that logic we could argue to make everything and anything secret, and end up living in a country like North Korea. Not exactly a particularly good outcome.

The best thing that can be said about the lack of transparency envisaged by the bill is that it is not yet set in stone. Mr Joyce acknowledged as much when he said the balance struck between administrative burden and transparency was a decision made by officials and further thought would be given to these aspects after submissions on the bill were heard.

This sounds very much like preparing the ground for some important changes. They will be most welcome if they favour more openness.

It certainly sounds promising that there will be change and we won’t have Auckland Transport being such a secret organisation. However, really this only one flaw in a highly flawed Bill, and doesn’t really answer the bigger questions of how will Auckland Transport be truly accountable to the people of Auckland when it’s so independent of the future Auckland Council? I suggest that a good number of further changes are needed to ensure accountability.

Share this