There were quite a few terrible things that happened to public transport last year, thanks to our good friend the Minister of Transport. One of the most depressing were announcements that the Public Transport Management Act – an utterly critical piece of legislation passed in 2008 to create better integration and cost-effectiveness in public transport delivery – was going to be gutted. I have blogged previously on why it’s so important the PTMA stays the way it is – with probably the most compelling reason being to get a better deal out of the money spent on public transport.
Rather oddly, after last year’s announcement that there was going to be change everything went quiet for a long while. I kind of hoped that perhaps this was one thing that would just slip off the radar – although I suspected not as ARTA’s Regional Public Transport Plan explicitly avoided using the powers they had sought so hard to obtain when the PTMA was being formulated. That was bitterly disappointing to see.
While there still hasn’t been public announcements over what will happen to the PTMA, a section from the July 2010 NZTA “Chief Executive’s Report to the Board” (which I obtained under the OIA as NZTA continue to refuse to post their board meeting information online even though they spend billions of tax dollars a year) sheds some light on where things are headed:
Some of this sounds reasonably promising – that we will see an “opening of the books” so that ARTA actually knows what’s going on with the public transport system it helps funds. Secondly, I’m glad to see that there’s going to be a trial period of any change before the legislation actually is amended. I hope that any shift back to the bad old days (which still exist actually as ARTA hasnt’ used the provisions in the existing PTMA that would give them much more power) of bus companies ripping off ratepayers (between 2000 and 2008 subsidies tripled while bus patronage only increased in line with population growth) raises some flags and we actually end up with legislation that works to create the best public transport system possible – not just legislation that works to improve the profit margin of the operators while Auckland’s PT system continues to lag behind the world.
What does frustrate me a bit is how all this is taking place in such great secrecy. While the PTMA may seem like a very dry piece of legislation to many, it has critical impacts on the quality of the public transport system directly experienced by the general public, and we ought to be kept in the loop.
Processing...
May I clarify something, what was paid in bus company subsidy in 2000 (total amounts) and what had that increased to by 2008?
Of interest, I hope:
Infratil’s Annual Report (here, p37) shows how its contract income has trended over the last few years:
http://www.infratil.com/media/PDF/ift_ar2010.pdf
Also, this Herald item from last year, raises other questions about bus company profitability or possibly the lack of it:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/public-transport/news/article.cfm?c_id=536&objectid=10604038
Specifically, “… Mr Wilson said he was satisfied from figures provided to him that NZ Bus was “not in a financial position to meet a major realignment of bus drivers’ wages at the current time”.”
I have a suspicion that an ‘opening of the books’, overdue though it is, may not give ARTA quite what it is looking for.
Ross, you make a good point that I should probably clarify what I mean by bus companies ripping off ratepayers. It’s not that they are demanding subsidies that are too high for each subsidised service.
The main problem is the fact that because there is no overall co-ordination you have lots of services competing against other services (the 135 bus for example almost exactly follows the route of the western rail line) which makes the whole system exceedingly inefficient. The bus companies have worked very hard to ensure it’s difficult for such co-ordination to happen.
Joyce doesn’t want anybody to know why fares are rising…
Jarbury, have you seen this? http://www.aucklandcity.govt.nz/council/projects/fitzroy/default.asp
While not knowing much about the specific street in question I feel like pedestrianization in the CBD can only be a good thing – right? Maybe you could do a blog to encourage submissions 🙂
Thanks Lucy, I was vaguely aware of that – although it’s a street I don’t think I’ve ever used before (which are fairly rare by the way!)
They are basically making a new entrance plaza for AUT’s business school. I used to walk up it every day when I worked there as it is the quickest route from Queen St to St Pauls. It’s a good idea IMHO, there is no need for cars to use that street while a heap of walkers do.
Since the ARTA is reluctant to use its powers under the PTMA there is no need for Joyce to gut it. The Act may as well not exist.
I hope the new Transport CCO wil grow some cojones in this area – and bring unregulated public transport under its umbrella too – Mike Lee was making encouraging noises on bringing Fullers into the system (not just the bits of its services that it claims don’t make a commercial return without a susbidy)
One of the key (and most controversial) parts of the PTMA was the ability of ARTA to regulate commercial services, such as the Waiheke Ferry – which pretty much everyone agrees is grossly overpriced due to the monopoly that Fullers enjoys.
This is the kind of issue where it will be interesting to see how the Transport CCO responds. Will the Council be able to convince them to change their attitude, will that encourage Joyce to make legislative changes? How independent will the CCO really be? All interesting to see.