The issue of SuperGold subsidies has arisen once again, this time in relation to which operators should receive them.

Waiheke Island’s new ferry operator says it cannot keep offering pensioners free passage without sharing a subsidy the Government pays its competitors.

The Explore Group says it will serve notice next week of an intention to charge fares for holders of SuperGold cards, most of whose travel at weekends and after 9am on weekdays on the rival Fullers passenger and Sealink car-ferry operations is reimbursed by the Government.

Explore chief executive William Goodfellow said older passengers, who had received free trips on his vessels since they started on the Auckland-Waiheke run in late October, would receive a grace period “of weeks rather than days” before having to buy tickets.

But after that, they would have to pay $16 for a one-way fare or $29 for return passage.

“The reason we have accepted them to date is that we believed we’d get a fair outcome from the Ministry of Transport for the whole SuperGold Card scheme,” Mr Goodfellow told the Herald.

“We’re doing it simply out of goodwill, because we thought fairness would prevail, but it obviously hasn’t.”

He was referring to a moratorium the Government has imposed against new services joining the SuperGold travel concession scheme while it is being reviewed to ensure its costs “remain sustainable.”

His company had initially expected the review to be completed by the end of last year, but had since heard that would not happen until at least June, and could not wait that long for subsidy relief.

Not only was it letting seniors travel free, but it was also paying a wharf tax of more than $1 each way for each one carried.

The scheme’s annual cost of $18 million after Labour and New Zealand First introduced it just before National swept to power in 2008 has since risen to $26 million, of which Fullers receives a capped payment of $1.5 million.

I’ve never been a fan of how SuperGold works however given it exists I do believe that the subsidy for trips between the City and Waiheke should be shared equally between operators based on the patronage each one carries. This is especially the case seeing as a return fare on the services cost the same and off peak the services are staggered to providing a 30 minute all day service to and from the island. Maintaining a moratorium on new services is absurd when both offerings are competing commercially.

The herald notes that SuperGold payments for trips to the island are capped at $1.5 million, that’s currently around 12% of all SuperGold costs for Auckland which in the last financial year totalled just under $12.3 million. That is made up of $8.6 million for buses, $1.2 million for trains and $2.5 million for ferries.

SuperGold Costs - 2014

Just how many trips on SuperGold trips are to and from Waiheke specifically is unclear however I’ve been able to find how many trips there are by each mode – although only up to the 2012/13 financial year. As expected buses made up the majority of patronage however the thing that surprised me the most was that comparatively SuperGold trips only made up a comparatively low 5.5% of all rail patronage.

SuperGold Patronage - 2013

Share this

39 comments

  1. Do those ferry patronage figures actually include the Waiheke run or only the AT subsidised services on the inner harbour? The thousands of passengers we see every day would suggest they do not.
    What actually needs to happen is expanding the monthly Hop pass to include the ferries. Oyster and Octopus card do this. It’s not rocket science, except in Auckland, it seems.

  2. This certainly is daft… essentially, Fullers and SeaLink are getting a free business boost at the expense of their new competitor. Seniors switch over to one of the other operators, potentially making some Explore services marginal or even the entire plan they had of beginning services to Waiheke. So that’s anti competitive. It could also make other potential PT entrants think twice about entering the NZ market, as their ability to get those subsidies could be very much in doubt. Potentially, that could have implications well beyond the Waiheke ferries.
    With that said, I think the case for subsidising senior citizen travel on Waiheke ferries is extremely weak. There aren’t any congestion reduction benefits. I don’t think there’s a strong socio-economic rationale either – some seniors may be short on cash and need to make trips, but going to Waiheke and back seems like a pretty low priority activity. And this is taking up 12% of the entire SuperGold subsidy in Auckland?
    What the government should really do is remove the subsidies for Fullers and SeaLink too, and make that particular playing field a level one. The Waiheke subsidies can be reallocated to public transport elsewhere in the region.

    1. I think the supergold card discount should only be provided to those that prove they live on the island.

      And the rebate should be spread to all operators based on numbers, if it hits the cap following the change above.

  3. I wonder if the rail figure is low because SuperGold cardholders who don’t have a Hop card don’t always bother getting a paper ticket.

    I’d also be interested to know what proportion of SG cardholders have a Hop card, or at least what proportion of SG trips are made with a Hop card.

  4. Should be loaded onto AT HOP card and require the card. This way usage can be tracked both in terms of for the Gold Card but also for overall patronage etc.

  5. Certainly, id prefer to see waiheke gold card subsidies discontinued than the scheme become so expensive that there is political pressure to scrap it altogether.

    Likewise, im not sure it should be accepted on premium services (like the airport flyer in the capital) where there is a cheaper alternative.

    1. How about a maximum subsidy fare (indexed by the average yearly PT fare or similar). If the fare is higher than the max you have to pay the whole fare yourself.

    2. I would also introduce a maximum subsidy, but if the fare is higher than the max, they person pays the difference. If the adult fare is $18.00 and the max fare is $10.50, then they would have to pay $7.50, for example.

    1. I’m pretty much on board with this but making it universal once you’ve surrendered your driver’s license. I’m not sure why I should be subsidising transport on top of all the other wealth transfers my generation ends up paying to people over 65.

    2. Just cause he is a landlord doesn’t get subsidy? How is this means testing supposed to occur, sounds a bit discriminatory to me.

      1. don’t you see the discrimination on the tax breaks passive landlords get compare to working tenants, subsidies and allowances to prop up their bubble, while normal people work their asses off to pay for their free trips to Waiheke?
        Also, if you can afford a Mercedes SUV you shouldn’t get free PT. If this is discriminatory for you, for me is fairness.

        1. I don’t discriminate against people for any reason, as far as I know he works 90-100hr weeks to afford his Mercedes.

          Doesn’t take away the benefits of getting him out of the car, being more active and having less burden on our health system.

          Also, as a property owner, and landlord…I can assure you I pay my fair share of taxes, and the fact the mortgage to rental income is out of kilter, the profits are just not there anymore. I’d be better off renting, but I’m looking at my long term future here. Yes I see this as discrimination, and the poor me, tall poppy syndrome that so prevalent in our country.

        2. you are right. Every rich person in the world just worked harder than the others, it’s just that I took the wrong decisions, so now i should pay for it. And my descendants. While rich people descendants are just other hard workers.

        3. I never said that, nor did I say otherwise…I said I don’t discriminate against anybody and the system shouldn’t either. He might not work at all and got all his $$ from inheritance. I would not assume anything, and even if he did, it doesn’t really make a difference. If they meet the requirements under Super-gold scheme then good on them. You usually find people who are well off and over 65 and still have their license, normally don’t go to the trouble of getting a gold card anyway, but it should still be their right too, and its great if it gets them out of the car and into public transport.

          Also to note, and off topic, most people who earn the big bucks, usually come from having nothing. They are the ones who know how to go without, people born into money might live an ok life, but they normally don’t have the discipline to get to the top of the pay scale, as they don’t know how to sacrifice to get ahead. There are exceptions to this however, but I’m tired of people using what they are born into as an excuse, when I have seen what can be achieved from that position. (The typical tall poppy will claim luck, but in reality you make your own luck).

  6. What I don’t understand is why the operator is reimbursed/paid the entire cost of the ‘lost’ fare when they are running the service anyway. I’d rather see the payment be partial, especially for Waiheke. As to seniors visiting Waiheke – has anyone ever done a study of the mental and physical health benefits of HOP use among seniors? I think it’s high time that was done, because it offers an economic as well as a social benefit.
    And lastly wouldn’t there be an outcry from cafes and such on Waiheke who benefit from the visitors?

  7. There is another situation where a new operator will hopefully be starting up competing with an existing operator that gets a SuperGold discount: The Harbour Bridge.

    My parents can use their super gold card to get from from Takapuna to the city for free on the bus. Will my parents be able to use their super gold card on the SkyPath to ride their bikes on the same route? (Or will they have to pay)

    1. Since the Supergold reimbursement scheme has been closed to new operators since 2010 – according to National – the current answer will be No.
      As Skypath will be a private operator like the new Waiheke Ferry operator.

      Now, once Auckland Council “owns” Skypath in say 10 years time (10 years as it will be Soooooo popular it will be paid off 20 years too soon), then presumably it would be like any other AT operation.

      But bear in mind, currently AT “wear” the cost of the evening peak PT travel, as Goldcard only covers the intra-peak/evening travel, not all travel from 9am as AT lets you do.

      So your folks going to town at 10am is covered by Goldcard, them coming home on Goldcard at 5pm – thats not, so AT pick up the tab.

    2. I would hope Skypath can be covered by the SG scheme, regardless of how it is owned and operated. The SuperGold scheme is a good one, it gives respect for senior citizens and has the added benefit of getting them onto public transport and off the roads. I get the sense that it is much appreciated by the senior community and I don’t understand why people here are in favour of denying it to them. That stance doesn’t seem justified by the numbers (in my opinion).

  8. I think most people are referring to the trips to Waiheke, not the bus trips. Trips to Waiheke don’t take people off the roads, and the social benefits are less clear.

    1. Yes, but if they use the Waiheke trip as an incentive to get a super gold card, which should also be a Hop Card…it might encourage them to use other forms of transport at other times?

  9. I wonder how long you have to bee in New Zealand before you are eligible for a gold card. Also what happens to the gold cards when someone leaves the country or is no longer with us. Do the cards get recycled.

    1. You must have lived in New Zealand for at least ten years before you can get a Gold Card, five of which must be after your 50th birthday. That’s in addition to being at least 65 years old and a NZ citizen or permanent resident.

      1. So in other words all these recent immigrants from China that are bringing in their parents can just pop them on a bus for free at the expense of the NZ taxpayer once they have been here for 10 years (having never worked or paid income taxes in NZ).

  10. Many of the comments above say how expensive the Gold Card is. I think $26m is much better value than many road schemes. The problem is that the government has pegged the budget at $17.9m for at least the next 3 years, whilst spending around $1,400m on new roads each year. If money has to be saved, surely it’s that hugely bigger budget the savings should come from, not Gold Cards. The unfairness of the moratorium must be apparent in many places other than Waiheke. For example, Waikato Regional Council decided to save money by cutting Raglan’s Sunday bus. The local District Council stepped in with a subsidy for a replacement bus, but it’s counted as a new service, so doesn’t have the Gold Card concession, even though it’s only a change in which council subsidises it and which operator runs it.

  11. If it were compulsory to use a supergold loaded Hop card, surely it would be easy to split the money?
    I know Winston might choke on his cornflakes but it seems a small inconvenience and cost to buy a Hop card and load the card onto it? It would also speed up boarding on buses and save all those paper tickets.
    I’ve already done it with mine.

  12. I agree with Harrymc – most people I’ve spoken to say they ‘use their goldcard’ for transport, as though it was a transport card. It is not nearly easy enough to put a superannuitant’s details onto a HOP card – it necessitates a trip to Britomart or one of the other major stations, and people see no particular reason to do it. They do not count the time that would be gained if they used HOP – time for the system, that is. I suggest that the concession should require it – and that the process should be made much simpler.

  13. If a new bus route is started by an existing operator that is in the supergold system will that new service be unable to take goldcard fares? In this case if goldcards are accepted by the bus operator how could this be checked?

  14. With the rail supergold patronage I assume it also includes those 100’s of supergold tickets the vandals used to print last year…?

  15. There is no doubt that an overhaul of the Super Gold Card providers is required ASAP. The freeze on new suppliers in 2010 by the Government was not widely understood.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *