On Friday the council finally announced three new board directors for Auckland Transport in a process that was delayed significantly due to the local body elections last year.
Former Finance Minister Sir Michael Cullen, Mary-Jane Daly and Kylie Clegg have been appointed to the board of the Auckland Council-controlled organisation Auckland Transport (AT).
The council’s Appointments and Performance Review Committee approved the appointments of the three new AT directors at its 29 March meeting following a rigorous and transparent selection process that sought directors with a high-level of political experience, solid financial acumen and significant experience in large and complex organisations.
Auckland Mayor Phil Goff welcomed the new appointments: “Auckland Transport has a vital role to play in addressing the city’s major transport challenges caused by unprecedented population growth.
“I need a strong and effective board to ensure good governance and delivery of key performance indicators. All three members have governance and business experience. Between them, they bring the financial, legal and political skills we need on the board,” Mayor Goff said.
Here are the official profiles for the new members.
Sir Michael Cullen
Sir Michael Cullen entered Parliament in 1981 and was Finance Minister from 1999 to 2008 and Deputy Prime Minister to Helen Clark from 2002 to 2008. His achievements include the establishment of the New Zealand Superannuation Fund and the creation of KiwiSaver. He was deputy chair, and went on to become chair of New Zealand Post and a director of Kiwibank.
Mary-Jane Daly
Mary-Jane Daly is Director of Cigna Insurance New Zealand Limited, a director of Kiwi Property Group Limited, Chair of the New Zealand Green Building Council, Deputy Chair of Airways Corporation and Deputy Chair of EQC.
Previously, Ms Daly served as Executive General Manager, and Chief Financial Officer at IAG New Zealand.
Before joining IAG, she spent four years with Fonterra as Group Treasurer and Risk Manager. She has also held positions at the Bank of New Zealand, National Australia Bank and Toronto-Dominion Bank in London.
Kylie Clegg
Kylie Clegg is deputy chair of Waitematā District Health Board, board member of Hockey New Zealand and chairs the New Zealand Hockey Foundation. She is a double Olympian and former New Zealand Olympic hockey captain.
Ms Clegg has a corporate legal background, having specialised in mergers and acquisitions across a range of industries. Her previous governance experience has been as a board member of the New Zealand Olympic Committee and the Halberg Disability Sports Foundation and as a board observer on Auckland Transport.
It’s great to see some more women on the board. We’ve long wanted to see more diversity on the board and these appointments at least make a positive move in that direction.
Perhaps the most interesting appointment though is former Finance Minister Sir Michael Cullen. Although I recall he was initially skeptical about PT, Cullen was ultimately the Finance Minister that signed off on projects like double tracking of the Western Line, building the New Lynn rail trench – after he was dragged out to see the congestion caused by trains through the middle of the old roundabout, and of course the Northern Busway. He had also agreed to electrification before the current government were voted in. I wonder if as part of his new role he’ll now wish he had invested more in transport in Auckland at the time. The Herald suggests he could eventually become the Chairman after Lester Levy’s term ends.
Now that these new members are appointed it means the board can get on with what will likely be their most important decision of the year, finding a new CEO to replace David Warburton, who is due to leave at the end of the year. We strongly hope they will come from overseas (a kiwi or otherwise) and be someone who understands that we need to build our cities very differently to how they have been over the last 50 years. A Janette Sadik-Khan of Auckland if you will.
Additionally Greater Auckland’s own Patrick Reynolds starts as a member of Customer Focus Committee:
“The addition of Patrick Reynolds as a co-opted member of our Customer Focus Committee is also welcomed,” Dr Levy said.
“Mr Reynolds is a well-known transport commentator with an urban design background who was a candidate for one of the vacant director positions. He has a background which will bring an even greater emphasis to improving the customer experience across all modes,” Dr Levy said.
Patrick Reynolds adds:
This means I will now be putting my energy into making positive change from the inside so I will be pulling back from helping Matt and the team here. I will, of course, still be reading every word and relying on everyone here, post writers and commentators, to help me stay well informed about AT’s work from the customers’ perspective, but also about ideas for our city to best fulfil its potential.
Auckland is going through a period of accelerated and sustained change and decisions made in our public institutions now will have profound and lasting effects, it is really important that everyone who cares at all about this city gets as involved as possible at this time. That’s how great cities happen; because their citizens want them to be better. Periods of growth like the current one come with new pressures but they are also the best chance we have to make profound changes, especially to break previous patterns through new investments and brave experiments.
I also want to take this opportunity to thank everyone here, especially my colleagues on the team, but also everyone who bothers to comment, whether in agreement with our views or not. You have all helped hone my understanding of our little city in particular and of the great human invention that is the city everywhere.
Processing...
Its exciting to hear Patrick helping out at AT. Best of luck!
From the outside it seems unfortunate that Patrick, being a candidate was not appointed to the Board.
It is hard to believe that the credentials of at least two of the appointees were ahead of and preferable to Patrick’s. but maybe that is the unfortunate way of politics.
My best wishes to him in his great endeavours to secure a better Auckland for us all.
They can’t appoint Patrick the the Board because he actually knows something about transport and is therefore disqualified. Instead the AT Board is made up of lawyers, politicians, sports people and doctors. The only transport knowledge any of the AT board members have is how to ride the gravy train.
And you think a photographer who writes a few blog posts in an echo chamber will do any better. As a rate payer this is ridiculous that someone off the social circuit can get appointed to a committee of a large government body without any credentials. Is this a paid role?
Yes, I think he will do better and his credentials as an informed blogger probably count for more than success in some totally unrelated field. Wait and see what he is capable of before you judge him.
Michelle, I’m charitably assuming you overlooked the part in the official PR quoted above about Patrick’s “urban design background “. As if AT would appoint someone just based on architectural photos and blogging.
Patrick has done more than many on the Board have in trying to clear the congestion on the roads so you can drive your Audi or Merc more freely, Michelle and I’m also a ratepayer and am thrilled he’s in a position to contribute fully.
No Michelle- not paid
Ain’t no echo chamber. It’s a widely read forum. Apart from applying, how do you think AT know about Patrick?
Rather ill informed and ill judged comment given Patrick has an urban design (and architecture) background that would very well suited to the Customer Focus Committee on AT.
Might also want to read this https://voakl.net/2017/03/23/building-community-through-urban-design-run-up-to-next-transformmanukau-chapters/
I have no problems with Patrick being on the committee. Sure, his credentials are questionable, however, there is no doubt that he has a keen interest in the subject. Why not let that enthusiasm be used productively. Lets face it, if more train spotters worked for the railways, they probably would be more efficient.
We had the pleasure of having Patrick Reynolds give a public talk at the City Gallery a year or so ago, and I’ve never heard someone discus urban issues so clearly and succinctly. He has lectured on Urban Design at University of Auckland and his whole life has been deeply imbued with architecture and urban issues. He’s also got the great ability to cut through the crap and get right to the heart of the matter, something that obviously works well for him as a photographer and I hope will also work well in his discussions with AT.
He also had a hit tv show on SoHo. I think he was some kind of scientist, set in New Mexico…
Lester – I note what you say and I am reminded of something Pres Obama has just recently said. ‘It is important we do not talk to an echo. It’s important that people with different views get together and discuss issues. Only then can compromises be accepted and progress made’.
For sure this blog is an echo chamber, as often is Auckland Transport. It will be healthy debate to have Patrick there to present the opinions of people that favour more urban/less cars. Just as it is healthy to have the other side of the debate.
Pretty sure the NZTA & MOT more than make up the other side of the debate.
All of these look like good appointments to take AT in the direction Auckland needs – an agency that understands that its mandate is moving Aucklanders efficiently and creating one of the world’s most liveable cities.
Yes yes and yes.
The focus of AT must move to being in charge of “efficiently moving people and goods” not the current mantra of “moving lots of cars and trucks”.
The latter prejudges the desired outcome, but doesn’t solve the issue.
The former states the outcome required, and doesn’t try to presume it knows how to solve it.
“I will, of course, still be reading every word and relying on everyone here, post writers and commentators, to help me stay well informed about AT’s work from the customers’ perspective, but also about ideas for our city to best fulfil its potential.”
I’m looking forward to my ideas being implemented 🙂
As for diversity it’s a bit of a laugh. Three high flying white people get added to the board and we have more diversity because one of them is a sheila? Could be the next Tui Billboard on the Southern Motorway!
Possibly two of them are sheilas, Matthew, but that doesn’t count as some form of diversity to you?
Not a lot of diversity if they are all rich white folks. I’d like to know if they also represent all parts of Auckland, or are they all from inside the old Auckland City boundary? My view is that the board should not be occupied by the wealthy, but by elected representatives from each ward of Auckland. They spend 40% of our rates and there seems to be no clear line of accountability.
Patrick – we will miss you, your humorous writing, and your beautiful photography. Good luck with being on the inside!
“My view is that the board should not be occupied by the wealthy, but by elected representatives from each ward of Auckland. ”
Couple of problems with this statement. If you elect members they still end up being wealthy. They usually also end up being really inexperienced. Surely it’s better to leave the political decisions at council and the implementation at a ‘non-political’ body such as AT.
If they are all from the old Auckland City boundary then they aren’t very good at spending money in the old Auckland City boundary! I can’t think of a major transport project in the central isthmus in 20+ years! Unless you count waterview…
West / south gets the trains / CRL, north shore gets the busway, east auckland gets AMETI, but central isthmus just gets the same crappy local bus services that have been around forever. If we are lucky we might get light rail in 30 years time…
Hmmm, I’d hazard a guess there are more train stations that sit inside the old ACC boundary than either Waitakere, Manukau and Papakura.
Anything north of Otahahu and east of Avondale (inclusive) was part of ACC if my memory serves me right.
In the last 20 years? Britomart, Double track all of the western line, electrification, completely rebuild CMJ, All of Stage 1 AMETI, Tiverton Wolverton, half of SH20.
While the CRL benefits the West mostly, the old Auckland city gets a huge benefit from it.
In terms of PT infrastructure spend in the last 2 decades and up to the completion of CRL, almost all of it is within the boundaries of the old ACC.
“While the CRL benefits the West mostly, the old Auckland city gets a huge benefit from it.
In terms of PT infrastructure spend in the last 2 decades and up to the completion of CRL, almost all of it is within the boundaries of the old ACC.”
Why is there this huge victim complex in Auckland, if everyone feels like they are being robbed then everything must be fairly well balanced, right?
Half of western line double tracking and New Lynn trenching was west, Manukau line was south at least half of electrification wasn’t in central suburbs the entire northern busway was in the north, the Half Moon Bay, Devonport, Beachhaven, and Hobsonville ferry upgrades weren’t ACC, half of the train station upgrades were elsewhere.
There has been PT development all over the urban area, and notably people from all over Auckland benefit from investment in the centre in a way that simply is not reversed in investment in the outer suburbs.
I meant excluding the central city (which is not where most former Auckland City residents live).
Yes there are some train stations in the former Auckland city, but most of them are poorly located (although that is probably true of most of the rail network). Heavy rail is more intended to move people longer distances. Mt Eden and Kingsland may be more useful when the CRL is completed.
Tiverton and Wolverton might be in Auckland City, but they are primarily used to carry west Aucklander’s.
SH20 is more of an Auckland City bypass than a road for Auckland City.
Can anyone name a project from the last 20 years where the principle purpose was to move former Auckland City residents? I can think of plenty everywhere else and plenty on the agenda like Mill Road, Penlink, AMETI, 2nd harbour crossing, motorway widening, NW busway, etc)
Sailor Boy – I think that was my point. While there are lots of projects within the former Auckland city, most of them are intended to move people from outside the former Auckland city (even the CRL IMO). I don’t think the residents of the former Auckland city are getting an unfair amount of transport spending.
Jimbo – “Can anyone name a project from the last 20 years where the principle purpose was to move former Auckland City residents?”
Newmarket Station ? Several million spent there…
“Newmarket’s rail station is the city’s second busiest after Britomart and is a key junction in Auckland’s rail network. It replaced the old station, which closed in January 2008, to allow for both track realignment and construction of a large, modern station. The two-year rebuild required major works in a tightly confined and busy space.” by Opus Architecture and Herriot +Melhuish:Architecture .
“While there are lots of projects within the former Auckland city, most of them are intended to move people from outside the former Auckland city (even the CRL IMO).”
I’m really failing to see what you’re arguing here; it seems like you are saying that old ACC area has most projects but the benefit to them is small from each one (which is probably true for many projects), but then also claim that they get less advantage than others. A small part of very many things is probably a whole lot.
Follow up:
“Can anyone name a project from the last 20 years where the principle purpose was to move former Auckland City residents?”
All of the roads in AMETI so far, the Glen Innes to CBD cycleway, the Grafton Gully cycleway, Lightpath and Nelson Street cycleways, Quay Street cycleway, the Onehunga Line.
That’s fairly hard to even determine thought isn’t it? Auckland has no ‘boundaries’ between where the old legacy council’s were (well maybe the harbour for the city vs north shore). The electrification of the rail network certainly benefited the residents of the old auckland city, as did britomart, as did newmarket. Sure many people may be from the south or west that use these stations, but many from the city commute south, or many from say ellerslie may commute to the city. Look at some HOP data – that will show you how the old isthmus area is benefiting.
Grafton Gully was a HUGE road spend that happened approx 12 years ago?
C’mon. The whole purpose of council amalgamation was to prevent this ridiculous parochialism about which suburbs and areas gain from which decisions.
It has been bad enough to see that continue around the Council table but it is extremely unhelpful here as well. Please leave it at home, wherever that may be.
Investment should match both current and future needs, especially for infrastructure with a long life. Given transport and urban design policy settings have favoured sprawl rather than density for over a decade, of course the focus of spending has matched. We must change that.
Govt holds most of the cards. Auckland only wins concessions with a unified voice.
@Sailorboy, you misread the intentions of my post (it wasn’t to rubbish CRL etc or to say it only benefits central Auckland etc, it was to point out that Jimbos post saying central Auckland has missed out is wrong).
Central suburbs do need to have some priority as they affect the entire city and in many ways get best bang for buck.
New rule: nobody who calls women “sheilas” gets to comment on diversity.
Sheila (noun) feminine of bloke.
I thought Michael Cullen wasn’t so much anti-PT as being a typical Otago anti-Aucklander, thinking it hilarious as our city drowned in its own filth. Then he was told Labour needed Auckland votes.
Reliably establishment appointments sure to not question the ideological assumptions, current organisational models and basic structures underpinning Auckland’s public transport, then.
Same same but different.
Same same but different – except for Patrick getting a role in the Customer Focus Committee? Surely, from what I know of Patrick, he will be just the right person to put forward some ideas that may take AT into a different sphere. I mean, for a start, surely the entire purpose of AT should be Customer Focus?
For a starter for 10, I’d like to think that Patrick might get the Board members to each have their own Hop card (hell, even I’ve got one, and I live in Wellington!) and get them to take public transport to work, ooh, at least 5 times a week. That should start some decent Customer focus amongst them!
“and get them to take public transport”! This! This! A hundred times this! Convince them take public transport for a week, then cycle for a week, then a mixed modal journey for a week. And if they say, “Oh, my meetings are too important to miss,” or, “Cycling is too inconvenient and unsafe,” or any one of a number of things, then maybe they will, just slightly, begin to understand.
How do you imagine one member of a sub-committee can “make” board members do anything except by soft influence? Charm and expertise are about all Patrick is armed with, realistically, given the context.
Very pleasing developments. Sir Michael Cullen will no doubt help with leading the next government to complete the works he started under Clark’s Government.
He was without a doubt one of the very best finance ministers we’ve had in NZ for a long long time time.
A large reason why we as a country weathered the GFC so well was mainly due to his financial prudence in the 2000’s in paying off Government debt as he did. Some say he went overboard a little with that, maybe, we’ll never know. But I’m sure he never would have consented [while in cabinet or as finance minister] to the budget busting RoNS program thats for sure – this National governments “Think Big for Roading”.
So I hope he lends an accountants “value for money” degree of scepticism to the Board.
Without standing in the way of truly innovative solutions we all know are out there in the big wide world right now, just waiting for NZ to finally come in from the cold.
Also great to hear that 2 women are on the board. I hope they also bring their corporate rather than political level of [critical] thinking to the board.
Makes a change from all the grey men, with even greyer ideas running AT.
Lastly, Patrick’s appointment – sad to see him depart the commentary pages.
But I hope the first thing he gets everyone at AT to do is to tell them to get a HOP card, [try and] top it up and then USE IT regularly.
Can’t be a customer focused establishment when your “back of house” staff don’t eat the same food you serve the punters in front
I’m sure once the AT folks try to “eat their own dog food” for a bit they’ll soon see the light and change the menu.
Patrick, I hope this isn’t a move by AT to silence you (from posting)!
Patrick is welcome to attempt to travel the length of this road and taste some of ATs work from this costomers perspective. Come when it’s raining for a special treat.
I won’t be holding my breath though.
And we’ll assign $1 in every $10,000,000 of budget to that road to give you your fair share.
Wow. Didn’t realise auckland has 10 million ratepayers.
Wow, didn’t realise ratepayers only drove on the roads they lived on. You road would be lucky to get even that piddling share of vkt.
Where’d you get that number from then? Just pulled it out of your arse?
Remind me again, how much did you pay the auckland council in rates last year?
I just clicked on the Board link above, and am pleasantly surprised to find that the two new women are not the only women directors on the Board. In full, it is now:
Dr Lester Levy, Chair
Wayne Donnelly, Deputy Chair
Kylie Clegg
Sir Michael Cullen
Mary-Jane Daly
Mark Gilbert
Rabin Rabindran
Dame Paula Rebstock
Ernst Zöllner (non-voting NZTA nominee)
So, you could say that putting aside the Chair and Deputy Chair and the NZTA nominee, the board now has 3 female Directors and 3 male Directors. It’s stretching the truth a bit to say it is balanced, but it is slowly heading that way. Now, the next step is to ensure that the mix is more ethnically diverse – didn’t Auckland Council have a Maori Board or did Rodney Hide reject that?
There’s an argument to say that the Board should more fairly represent its customers / passengers / users. Possibly via Ward boundaries, but possibly also by ethnicity. Rabin Rabindran is both an experienced barrister and also a valued member of the Indian community, so that is a good start. In which case, at the next full election of the Board, AT should be working very hard to get on board members having good connections with the Chinese, Pasifika and Maori communities as well.
Okay, Michael Cullen did more for rail in Auckland than any other central government politician in the past 70 years. But the other two?
What does a person whose life has revolved around insurance or another who has a fairly solid background in sports know about transport?
I would go further and say these corporate types wouldn’t know an EMU from a double decker. Do they even use PT, would they have something as basement level as a HOP card, better than even chances they do not. I mean when did they last use PT?
Is their heart and soul in improving the gridlock that is Auckland, do they really care or is this another notch on their corporate belts?
I have seen this so often in my life, lots of connections, university qualifications, corporate world careerists but NO idea about the job they have landed. Yes they are figureheads, blah, blah, blah and sure if Hockey was a key part of AT or insurance we are in great hands, but I expect nothing but the same, clueless leaders reliant on advisers who will drift off to the next corporate post with a fatter CV, unnoticed and forgotten and we are none the better for it!
At least Patrick has a genuine passion for transport in Auckland and articulates this well and for me that matters the most.
Agreed. It’s like appointing Steven Joyce (broadcaster), Gerry Brownlee (teacher) and Simon Bridges (lawyer) to Minister of Transport and expecting them to be competent when they really haven’t a clue.
Sir Michael Cullen (as a former Minister of Finance) also began in ignorance believing that Transport=Roads, but unlike his three inept successors he proved educable on the importance of funding rail. He went on to rescue NZ’s rail-system from privatised oblivion, approved the Wellington rail upgrades and Matangi-purchase, and personally stepped in to save the electrified Johnsonville Line from being destroyed for a nonsensical diesel-busway – and all this in addition to his exploits in Auckland.
That man deserves a DB as well as his knighthood.
I hope Mary-Jane Daly and Kylie Clegg turn out to be of the same abilities as Dr Cullen.
The AT Board needs to be expanded to include Patrick as a full member in view of his long standing highly relevant experience, his dedication, his application and his urban design knowledge.
The fact that none of the other successful candidates would appear to match these most outstanding and desirable abilities does not give me much faith in the performance of the Auckland Council’s Appointment and Performance Review Committee. Perhaps they themselves should be up for review.
I can however, understand why Dr. Cullen was appointed.
Further to the comment above, I looked up the Appointment and Performance Review Agenda for the Meeting of 29 March and noted (Item 32) that Chairman Lester Levy ” recommends retaining the current Board (numbers) of eight Council appointed Directors.
Taking advice from the chair, the size and complexity of the AT business, the major capital programme and associated risks, staff recommend that the Auckland Transport Board remain at 8 Directors, with a review of Board size in 2019″.
In view of his credentials and experience it is to be hoped that Patrick is “the first cab off the rank” and elevated to full membership of the Board when such review takes place.
Its a bit cringing to suggest the CEO needs to come from overseas. Ive nothing against that idea but whos to say we dont have an NZ version of JSK amongst us. Maybe you are saying we need someone from outside AT to come in and change the culture – that is different from saying they have to come from overseas.
I hope Ludo applies.
I think the idea is that they have experienced cities overseas where PT plays a much bigger role. The post specifically mentions how it could be a New Zealander with overseas experience.
Yeah I don’t think it is beyond an educated NZer to appreciate that things are very different in other countries. One of the biggest developments for Auckland transport over the medium term looks to be Time-Place-Distance road pricing. Unless we hire a staid Singaporean bureaucrat I doubt we will get someone with direct experience in this field even from overseas. So what we want is someone with the capacity to get a handle of new ideas and concepts and the ability to cut through unspoken institutional assumptions.
A NZ version of JSK ? Actually, we do. There’s a woman called Skye Duncan working in New York for the Global Street Alliance who has been working for JSK for a number of years and is well capable of taking on this project. And she’s a kiwi too! I’m sure she could be enticed back here to help sort out Auckland (if Wellington doesn’t grab her first!).
The appointment criteria were about experience overseeing large spending decisions. The result gives no confidence that AT’s top table will have any more understanding of their agency’s pivotal role in the region’s future or of transport policy in general. Even Cullen delayed crucial public transit infrastructure investments for many years as Finance Minister.
However, the AT Board was never intended to represent the region’s population in any way – that’s Council’s role. The weakness of Council’s real influence over AT’s direction compared with central govt’s power (as set by law) is about to be tested again over Linear Park. Having another couple of lawyers or accountants on the Board won’t make any difference there.
Yes the structure is an issue. A deliberate hobbling of democratic leadership at the local level by central government. In the case of New York, the commissioner is appointed directly by the mayor. (I have just learned via google)
Congrats Patrick on getting ‘inside’.
Can you get AT to open platform 2 at Newmarket? That would make for a lot of happier AT customers 🙂
Have some patience the safety cases are in the process, it is now considered safe to open both sides on a 3 car there are just a few adjustments to be made to allow for 6 cars to do it too.
Why do they want to open both sides for? They just need to open the other side instead.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/14/e2/df/14e2dfa25594cb398c9ee44ef852f0be.jpg
This may help you in future when BigTed claims anything about the rail network.
Do any of these new appointments (apart from Patrick), use a transport mode other than the private vehicle? seeing as these other modes are what need to be developed.
It is sad that the council don’t have much talent management policies in place. The pool from which they recruit their candidates is appalling.
Three white persons with little experience outside NZ.
Hmm one had experience overseas and wasn’t successful. Great. Makes you wonder how they recruit for these positions. Successful in NZ but failed elsewhere=tick, successful in the countries we aim to replicate = disqualified. Its sad. HR needs a serious work around to make any council organisation work.
Well at least they didn’t recruit someone from the UK again (what happened to our UK bicycle-champion that we found and paid 250K plus for to bring out here – shakes head in disbelief)
Singapore or Denmark or for that sake anywhere that has seen rail built from virtual scratch over the last 30 years seems like good places to start looking.
However this is board positions so well its not operations but yet, its not good when we cant diversify at all and its downright scary when two middle aged white Auckland women is a sign of diversification. Wonder what diverse experiences and understanding they bring…
Anyway its board positions, more important, the new CEO I really hope that they broaen their horizons when they recruit for that key position. Do some real research.
Find candidates that come with international experience from key growth centres, with networks among (not Fletcher and Infratil) Asian and Western world leading software and engineering companies and who have managed large complex public transport organisations before. These kind of candidates should be first and second on the list. I know that progressive nations have recruited heavily among Singaporeans, Scandinavians and Germans and well that talent pool seems like where any New Zealand organisation would start their headhunt for a suitable candidate.
Having a professional like that with such a background put his/her mark on management, hire his/her people and change the organisation, its culture would be a wet dream.
But a more likely outcome is that we recruit a new CEO and the main merit is a successful stint managing one aspect of public transport in Glasgow or being an interim CEO in Swindon, then pay them 500K plus relocation and boast about it in NZ Herald…
AT is about more than just trains and motorcars. It’s also about how these modes impact on walking, cycling, school travel, effects on obesity and health in general and accessibility for those less able bodied than myself.
I don’t see a “public forum” part on AT’s agenda for the next meeting. But it appears that there is a public input part of the meeting of the Council’s Performance and Review Committee. Followed by input from Local Boards. And clearly highlighted is the rule that the public must leave the room when asked. 🙂
Seems to me that’s where PT and Cycling/Walking Advocates need to put some effort this year. It the Performance and Review Committee were slowly educated about road reduction happening in more progressive cities, about how induced demand works, about how one person with vision can completely change a city… they might be inspired when it comes to appointing the CEO.
Great to see Patrick’s role. I also think the other appointments are likely to be a good step forward. People from all walks of life can learn to appreciate the in’s and out’s of public transport/active modes etc, would be good if they did or were made to use it at least some days of the week though.
And this, actually doing something about it.
https://careers.aucklandtransport.govt.nz/jobdetails;jsessionid=FD7B697D232E1C4E796054D2C369CE7D?ajid=VJF89