Much like Auckland Transport did a year ago following local body elections, Waka Kotahi are showing their true colours by quickly cancelling pausing walking, cycling and public transport projects in the wake of the general election. Radio NZ reports:

Waka Kotahi (New Zealand Transport Agency) is putting on hold hundreds of millions of dollars of funding for projects designed to reduce New Zealand’s emissions through encouraging walking, cycling and the use of public transport.

In a statement, the transport agency said before it could follow through with commitments already made to councils and other organisations, “it needs a clear direction from the incoming government on its transport investment priorities”.

“We have informed affected council partners and we will provide further updates as we receive direction from the incoming government.”

Waka Kotahi said the funding pause would affect the $305 million Transport Choices Programme where the transport agency was working with councils to deliver cycleways, walkable neighbourhoods and “make public transport more reliable and easier to use”.

So far 46 councils around the country have applied for Transport Choices funding.

The decision would also affect VKT (vehicle kilometres travelled) reduction planning, which aimed to lower the number of kilometres travelled by New Zealand’s light vehicle fleet through the promotion of walking, cycling and public transport use.

Both initiatives were funded via the Climate Emergency Response Fund (CERF) set up by the government to support the transition to a low-emissions and climate-resilient economy. Earlier this year it had a balance of $3.6 billion.

These are the Auckland projects that are funded by the Transport Choices programme.

Understandably, advocates like ourselves are annoyed and frustrated.

Cycling Action Network spokesperson Patrick Morgan said it was “unacceptable and outrageous” the agency was pre-empting the new government by blocking urgently needed cycling, walking and transport projects.

Dozens of councils had been left in limbo by Waka Kotahi, after putting months of work into proposals, he said.

Some already had contractors in place, so scrapping the initiatives could lead to job cuts and wasted money, Morgan said.

Living Streets Aotearoa president Tim Jones said Waka Kotahi’s actions were “very disappointing”.

“I question what message that sends to the incoming government. Waka Kotahi is an agency with a degree of statutory independence – I don’t think it’s showing much of that independence here.”


Morgan said many of councils that applied for funding from the Transport Choices Programme were in National strongholds, so he would be surprised if a National-led government pulled the plug.

“Increasingly New Zealanders understand our roads need to be safer for everyone, and that moving to low carbon transport is the way of the future.

“We have commitments under the Climate Agreement to do that, and more bike lanes, more bus lanes, and pedestrian upgrades are urgently needed.

“The government should be increasing the pace on this, not hitting the pause button.”

As Patrick says, this is outrageous and if they really cared about getting what their own evidence suggests are the best outcomes for New Zealand, they push to get as many of these projects committed before the incoming government changes the rules. If they even change them that much, as it’s not uncommon for new governments to drop some of the extreme rhetoric from their time in opposition – and National’s rhetoric was extreme over the last six years, turning every policy or decision into a culture war.

What stands out to me is I don’t recall the same thing happening in the opposite direction back in 2017 when Labour was elected. In fact, even when the Labour government gave them explicit instructions, Waka Kotahi often ignored them.

One example of this is Warkworth to Wellsford, where Waka Kotahi continued to work on design and consenting roads like Warkworth to Wellsford regardless of the change in government policy.

For another example, Labour created a new Government Policy Statement which placed a greater emphasis on safety, access, the environment and value for money. As part of that they required Waka Kotahi to re-evaluate a range of state highway projects to come up alternative solutions that were faster and cheaper to deliver than large motorway/expressways. One of those was the East-West Link and Waka Kotahi simply didn’t even bother doing it – this is also on Labour for not following it up.

The comments we were getting back from inside the organisation at the time was that many people assumed Labour would be a one-term government, so they were just going to wait it out and then get back to “business as usual” highway building. Though you could say they were successful in waiting it out, as I don’t think they delivered much on these – and most of the re-evaluated projects suddenly made it back onto the transport policies of both National and Labour. Their biggest change was to embrace a lot of green/bike/bus-washing in their statements.

Waka Kotahi needs to get on with approving the Transport Choices projects. The climate certainly isn’t waiting to see which way the new government leans.

Share this


    1. LOL
      Actually it is translated “single occupant vehicle” so it makes plenty of sense.

      I think the whole organisation needs to be scrapped. It is out of touch with reality and no longer fit for purpose.

  1. The next left coalition needs to learn that one of its first tasks should be to restructure the transport ministry and, in doing so, replace the senior managers in road and rail management. The problem will be identifying replacements. How can that head hunting be done?

      1. How would this help, Guy?

        The job of the Chief Executive Officer is to execute the policy of the board.
        The board of WK needs to figure out what their objectives are, what the corresponding policies are and then make sure that the CEO and their band of acolytes put those policies into action.

        Now it is nice to think that reduction in GHGs, reduction in deaths and serious injuries, getting the best outcomes from a constrained budget and other such admirable aims are right up there as WK objectives.

        Is Patrick Reynolds still on the board of WK? I used to spar with Patrick here on GA but that was more about me honing my on-line debating skills for the battles ahead. I respect his viewpoint and his rhetoric but no doubt he is constrained from participating here. It would be interesting to get his perspective on this (off the record, of course).

        One thing I do know is that a WK doing the bidding of a National-lead government is going to be a car crash of epic proportions with damage that will last for generations.

        In my recent battles with Auckland Council and Council-controlled organisations I have learned that when you have difficulties understanding the motives of organisations and management therein it’s best to go back 2000 years to the advice the ancient Romans gave us; cui bono. In other words, follow the money.

  2. Nicole Rosie once said “I would say the two things that Waka Kotahi’s got strong advocacy on: One is climate change. And the other is – this is internally within our people – the other is safety.”

    Such strong, strong advocacy./sarc

    1. And she said in the same interview:

      “Nobody in the world has achieved this level of change that we’re being ambitious about in New Zealand, which is awesome. We will be world leading, but it means we’ll also get things wrong along the way. So, you know, we’ve got to be willing to push boundaries, but we don’t want to lose our momentum and traction along the way.”

      Put to the test, Rosie wasn’t “willing to push” any boundaries, and clearly couldn’t care about losing any “momentum and traction”.

    2. “I would say”

      Note the conditional tense, Caitlin. Under what conditions would she say that? If it were true.

      I think that you are being harsh on Nicole. Strictly speaking she is correct…and this is why they are smarter than us and get paid more money. They really know how to use words. (I was going to say weasel words but that is unfair on weasels)

        1. Yet there was an announcement about gaining Resource Consent for the remaining stage of GITD.. Why bother announcing that if there is no funding to build it. So we can watch the clock tick off the days until the consent lapses…….?

        2. It’s like watching a show motion train wreck repeat itself. Exactly the same has already happened this year with the access way to the “completed” Stage 2 of GI2TD, which we were advised was going to be built during the Eastern line close down this year. It’s only when residents started asking when work would begin (months into the shutdown) it emerged that AT had pulled the funding on the back of changes in priority funding. I guess at least WK made it public, rather than hiding it as AT did…..

        3. “Yet there was an announcement about gaining Resource Consent for the remaining stage of GITD.. Why bother announcing that if there is no funding to build it. So we can watch the clock tick off the days until the consent lapses…….?”

          To be fair, it wouldn’t have made sense to not get a consent! Consents are needed so that money can finally be spent when it is available. Our governmental shelves are full of consented motorways and roads – if anything we need more consented cycleways ready for agencies / politicians when they finally get the point…

          A consent like this lasts at least 5 years, sometimes longer if applied for accordingly. And it can be extended before it lapses. So this is definitely not dead (but will not proceed for years…)

        4. Yes indeed. This video by Shifter, particularly the summary chapter talks about his. Having things ready for when governments/councils/agencies are ready to do them.

        5. There is an obvious gap in where the connection from Tipene Place to GITD is to be installed. The railway line is closed so there is an unbeatable opportunity to do this work, yet when I went along GITD last month there was no sign of any work ongoing.

          And now we hear that “…AT had pulled the funding on the back of changes in priority funding.” What the hell?

          This is a connection that NEEDS to happen and there will never be a better time to deliver it. How did this “change in priority funding” occur?

          I despair.

        6. “How did this “change in priority funding” occur?”

          A Labour govt that didn’t really care, and suddenly needed the money elsewhere (Hawkes Bay). A new National Govt that cares even less.

          An AT that is deeply ambivalent about cycling itselves

          It will happen. Local (and quite influential, for better or worse) politicians are in favour, the site is owned by Council, the plans are in place… it’s just so sad that even these kind of projects who have all that support get pushed back. Makes you despair for anything that’s actually controversial.

  3. “Much like Auckland Transport did a year ago following local body elections”…

    How did that AT decision end for acting CEO Mark Lambert? Once the decision was put under scrutiny, and pressure was applied, it didn’t look particularly appropriate, did it?

    So, scrutiny and pressure on WK management is what is needed. Pausing much-needed work in the anticipation of policy that puts lives in danger is unethical and unprofessional. WK have no idea of how the details of policy will emerge, given the tempering processes involved in the system.

    That more people will die because of this politicking is just revolting, Rosie. And it’s on you.

  4. LAbour had 6 years and 3 years with a complete mandate to do something about the mess that is WK. They could have created a Ministry of Works, Ministry of PT and Active modes, Minsitry of anything…but they knew WK only wanted to build roads so in term plumped them full of roads to build. These sort of changes aren’t ones that your every day voter will lose their mind over either. Even though walkin and cycling is like 1% of the transport budget people lose their minds when they think its a choice between pot hole repairs and cycleways (its not). If you shrink the transport (aka road budget) a little and create a seperate budget for active modes, can even put it in with health) you start to take away the tools for culture wars. Easier to take the tools away rather than expalin the evidence to people people aren’t smart.

    1. In Labour’s defense I doubt they ever thought they’d have an agency whose management literally went rogue on them. Pulling the trigger on a entire swath of senior management – senior management that has often been on a revolving door with road transport lobbyists and enjoying considerable support from well funded vested interests & with strong support in the right wing MSM – would be a major scandal , and lead to a confrontation between the government and a department of state unlike anything since the the 1935 Labour government. It would take politicians of the stature, drive and determination of Bob Semple and Paddy Webb to see that sort of thing through. And you can be sure the student activists and parliamentary staffers who make up the modern professional political class of Labour don’t currently have the guts for that sort of fight.

      1. What does it take to see that the car / freight / road / oil lobby had unhealthy levels of influence in the nz transport sector, though? And even if they’d not understand that before 2017, the lay of the land became crystal clear within the first two years of government.

        1. One finds it interesting that a lobby group such as this one is OK but lobby groups for the car / freight / road / oil are not?

        2. Your comment is ridiculous. Heidi is talking about “unhealthy levels of influence”, not that (some level of) lobbying is OK or not. And if you think the influence of this blog is in some way comparable to the roads lobby, I don’t know what world you are in. Not the one we all *drive* in!

          Anyway can you imagine the outcry of some groups if, say, Waka Kotahi stopped all motorway projects BEFORE the policy has changed due to a new government? There’d be editorials from all sorts of high and mighties about how that is destructive to our rule of law, democracy, economy and western way of life.

          That’s “undue influence” of lobbying. Bureaucrats jumping to do what they clearly always wanted to do, before even being instructed, and against the (still in place) statutory policies.

        3. There’s a big difference between a lobby group and and advocacy group: money.

          Lobby groups use it to get more of it, advocacy groups don’t have any.

        4. pfft – a good point is made. GA, Bike Auckland, GenZero are all lobby groups that shamelessly promote their own agenda. Look at the way Patrick Reynolds found his way onto WK (via a dodgy dinner with JAG and PT) and yet you claim that the Transport lobby has unhealthy influence!
          At the end of the day both Auckland in the local elections and NZ in the General election have shown a strong shift to the right of center politics. National and ACT have been very clear in their signally and the voters responded. You may not like the result, but you need to respect the will of the populace. That is how democracy works.

      2. “In Labour’s defense I doubt they ever thought they’d have an agency whose management literally went rogue on them.”

        I talked to a certain high up green party transport politician about 2 years into the Labour/NZ First/Greens coalition (where the greens had to sit outside the door like poor cousins…) . She mentioned that a certain Labour transport politician was being really naïve about constantly how he was being blocked in MOT and NZTA…

        So – no. They totally should have known after 1-2 years. They just kept being stupid every time. Even changing transport ministers didn’t help them. Senior management in the bureaucracies must have been having a beer every Friday laughing about how easy they were able to be led, delayed and simply ignored.

        1. For the best part of a quarter of a century MMP & prevailing othodoxies has molded Labour into a centrist party dedicated to small “c” conservatism and populated by nice, left leaning, liberal middle class whose primary skillset seems to be being good at running a committee. Their electoral appeal is to manage the exisiting way of doing things in a kinder way and in handing out the patronage and sinecures to a different bunch of great and good from the last lot.

          Why people would think that such a party when handed an absolute majority by an electoral system predicated on not handing anyone an outright majority would suddenly transform into a vehicle full of rough edged ball busters and hard nosed reformers on a mission is anyones guess. They simply didn’t have the political comprehension or the fire in their bellies to grasp the opportunity.

          Labour is now back where it was in 2017 – in last chance saloon, staring down the barrel of the fate of the Liberals in the 1920s. It’s being squeezed by the Greens and TPM, and if it doesn’t have the political nous to see that and do some urgent re-thinking on how it plans to deliver services it may be all over for them in the next decade.

        2. “Why people would think…”

          I didn’t – I knew right after the last election this would be a caretaker style goverment that wouldn’t achieve much. They under-performed even my low expectations, though.

        3. We got what we voted for. They were not a ball busting kind of party or leader.

          Not that a global pandemic had anything to do with lack of progress….think about it, lock down March 2020, the distraction of government agencies alone…election Oct 2020.

    2. The people in Labour all have a trust of institutions and a trust of public servants. I don’t know why but they do. Their answer to everything was to create a larger department with more staff. They squandered their political capital on unpopular reform that made, or would have made, government departments larger. They must have genuinely thought that was what people wanted.

      1. Definitely agree with miffy for once on that one: “The people in Labour all have a trust of institutions and a trust of public servants.”.
        Maybe that was needed at the time to ride out the pandemic when you think about it.

        1. Maybe. But there was no public support for merging RNZ into TVNZ, no demand to create large government departments to deal with storm water and I don’t remember much support for creating a health mega ministry to run all the hospitals from Wellington. Add to that hundreds of policy analysts. They were supposed to sort out housing. But all they have done is make developments harder and more expensive.

        2. “They were supposed to sort out housing. But all they have done is make developments harder and more expensive.”

          Ummm…. that’s the one thing where they made big progress, thanks to making intensified development EASIER? Labour have a lot to be blamed for, but housing rules they actually simplified and made easier to build lots of urban dwellings.

          Sadly that too is on the chopping block. We will see a coalition with “Libertarian” ACT in the mix create more onerous rules against housing. What a fricking farce they are.

  5. It is actually insane that they are acting like this like this. Core government departments are not doing this, so why on earth is the more independent entity?

    1. Quite. More independence is supposed to lead to more ability to act on the science, not to take regressive, highly political actions.

  6. Sadly, we’ve reached the day where our senior civil service is now politicied in key agencies. Any incoming government in the future will also need a list of senior managers it expects to resign & a list of who they propose replaces them, like they do in the United States. That list has the advantage of giving the voters a real flavour of the agenda of any incoming administration.

    1. Understandable, but horrific if true. Trump’s disastrous spell in the oval office was literally like watching a car crash happen, over and over again, in slow motion. Putting oil executives, arms dealers and politically naive debutants in charge of key portfolios, along with members of his family in charge of Middle East peace – all was horrible.

      In my view we need to avoid what Sanctuary is proposing like the plague. Our government has worked, in the past, because it had a civil service who did what they were told. Waka Kotahi is, as all can see, solely focused on roads, and maximising the vehicle numbers on them. And it is the most incoherent, badly performing department out there. Not a model we want to emulate or repeat elsewhere.

      One thing I would say, though: bring back the Ministry of Works. Not necessarily the thousands of workers who did the actual work, but certainly the planning side of it, that planned the future of the whole country. Seemed to work fine at the time.

  7. The next left coalition govt needs to be far more cynical and low trust of public officials. It’s unlikely that the same people will be in power in Waka Kotahi in 6 or 9 years. But their successors need to be treated with extreme suspicion and reformed / restructured out of their positions at the slightest hint of subversion to the goals of the government or failing targets.

    On the other hand, the next government are only looking like they will reward the extreme cost disease of the motorway projects, at the same time will be fighting inflationary pressures. I strongly suspect they will be able to deliver only a very small fraction of what they promised while pouring in good amount more money. We might finally reach a point where the public demand reforms like were done for electricity in the early 90s and set us on a better structural path.

    1. “I strongly suspect they will be able to deliver only a very small fraction of what they promised while pouring in good amount more money.”

      They will do more PPPs. In other words, they will borrow money from our older selves and our kids, to build more motorways.

      And then the next Labour government will shrug when the bills come in, and say “What can we do?” [Ignoring the fact that they tend to constantly ignore the ability to pull the plug even when they ARE in power – i.e. why the heck was our Covid economic response basically “Labour builds motorways!”? They don’t believe in what they preach.

      1. While they are not my preference, I think PPPs are going to have to be in the mix if we are to bridge our infrastructure gap.

        1. We have a systems thinking gap, not an infrastructure gap. Our entire network needs repurposing. But here’s the thing: in the future, the costs imposed by climate change will be greater. So they won’t be able to pay for it.

          We should pay for our projects now, through taxes and charges, smoothed out over, say, three years. Our children will have their own projects to pay for. Think it through, KLK. None of this is “investing in the future”. It’s simply “refusing to pay for the costs of our pathetic planning paradigm, and stuffing up our children’s chances”.

  8. Metal side barriers have being installed on the road between the turn off on the old state high way two and Kaiaua over the last few months. No doubt this was state funded I wouldn’t imagine the local council would have had the money. Anyway to say nothing was achieved is wrong I am sure there are many other similar examples.

    1. “No doubt this was state funded I wouldn’t imagine the local council would have had the money.”

      Uhm. No? It’s a Waikato Council Road. Yes, they would get co-funding, but Waka Kotahi doesn’t do works on non-State Highways.

      And what they should have done was put in median barriers on SH2 east of SH1. I worry I’ll die on that road one day. It’s so poor until you get to Mangatawhiri Road. But it seems the only way that will ever get fixed is via some massive “everything AND the kitchen sink (well, except bikeways)” upgrade like further east.

  9. I have got to a point where I have contempt for Wellington civil servants because they treat the public with contempt. A reckoning of some description is coming.

  10. The reason they have “paused” these is because NZTA don’t have the money to pay for the projects,

    The Funding is from the CERF fund, and It looks like it is allocated quarterly by Treasury, which is why NZTA have pulled the pin , they are not certain that they will get any future funding ( Q1 2024 onward) , so it would be irresponsible for them to mislead local councils into future projects they could not fund…

    NZTA have statutory control over NLTP funds, so they can continue with those projects as they control that funding in house..

    1. If projects under design consistently had the pin pulled because they “might” not receive funding in future, there are hundreds of road widening projects that WK should have pulled the pin on in the last 6 years.

      It’s not reasonable for WK to assume the MoT would let policy shift so radically. Rather, it is professional for them to work to ensure cycling, walking and public transport projects get funding through some avenue or other, and therefore to allow their designs to continue. The responsibility for drivers to pay to keep others safe from their danger doesn’t disappear with a new government. WK’s responsibility to create a system that protects lives and ensures a stable future doesn’t disappear. The consistent, majority support for investing in safe cycling networks doesn’t disappear, either.

      Note, the GPS hasn’t changed. It is the official direction until it is no longer the official direction.

      In short, rather than it being “irresponsible for them to mislead local councils into future projects they could not fund”… it is utterly irresponsible of them to mislead the public into thinking transport experts are political puppets.

      There are professional standards to uphold. And WK doesn’t measure up.

      1. This is the real point. Mayor Brown should be onto this very quickly. ATAP will need to reset priorities, but as Govt/ Auckland Partnership.

        Until GPS is revised, the Waka is still under current GPS direction. Slowing down for an expected iceberg is one thing, but stopping dead in the water is not the best option. Especially as many of the projects under threat may still be chosen to proceed.

        WK’s real issue should be where to find enough funding for road maintenance and renewal. The amount needed is nearer to a vanity-project motorway scale than the small but vital projects that can be delivered in less than two terms. How long did Puhoi-Warkworth and Transmission Gully take from start to finish? How soon could any PPP super-project take to opening date? When would NZ ever finish paying foreign investors for them?

        1. “but stopping dead in the water is not the best option.”

          But that’s what Chris Hipkins decided after the cyclones – he stopped a lot of projects to pay for climate change. He didn’t cancel any motorway works tho that I am aware of. “Sorry, we got other priorities than climate change transport policies now (we need the money to pay for climate change damage!)”

          That’s the extra sadness here. If Labour had won another term, their actions would likely have been as pathetic as before. No wonder anyone who actually cared voted Greens.

          [And to be clear: Being in government, when you care about more than BEING IN GOVERNMENT, means taking a leadership role and advocating for why problems need to be fixed. But Labour didn’t care, and National aggressively cares about the opposite tack. We’re FU***ED for a few years in transport policy now.]

    2. Agree with Heidi here and if this were even true, Greenwelly: “The Funding is from the CERF fund, and It looks like it is allocated quarterly by Treasury, which is why NZTA have pulled the pin , …” it still hasn’t happened, we don’t even have a new government yet. Besides they could just deal the councils by saying everything is “subject to CERF (or other) funding”.

  11. This move by them is atrocious, very disappointing and also quite frankly plain stupid.

    It also shows the annoying aspect of our 3 year term of governments. It’s such a waste of efficiency with each election with the politicising of issues building up to the election and processes we go through after, especially when we change over to different colours.

    Thankfully we have NZ First to at least hold up the heavy rail, particularly freight, banner or we might of seen the demise of Te Huia for starters. A pure National / Act government would of been bonkers for our transport and urban planning direction.

    1. Another thought is at least we see David Seymour riding an e-bike, not sure where he stands on separated facilities though. Surely riding Auckland roads makes you realise how much you need them?

  12. Very disappointing to see the Northern Busway feeder routes again in limbo. These were supposed to be built in tandem with the busway itself as North Shore City’s contribution to the overall scheme, thus connecting the numerous local services with the stations (interchanges) along the busway. Unfortunately the funding mechanism through DCS (Development Contributions) was legally challenged by some big developers and thrown out. It is now 17 years since the busway became operational but despite its huge success to date remains hampered by its missing links.

      1. Bus station is built by WK. It’s the buses connecting to it that are on the block.

        Yes, they’re perfectly happy to build a bus station but not fund the buses that go to it.

        1. The bus station is not built and all work on it and the street underneath it for connecting services, has stopped. There’s been no progress for months. All it is now is a slow point on the journey as it has a 30kph speed limit through it.

  13. Run your eyes over these words from the WK website for this is the last time you may ever see them.

    “Why reducing VKT by the light fleet is important

    Two-thirds of transport emissions come from the light vehicle fleet. Reducing reliance on fossil-fuelled vehicles is at the heart of the transport emissions challenge. We cannot rely on decarbonising the vehicle fleet quickly, as international supply constraints mean we are unlikely to be able to access enough electric vehicles (EVs) to rely on this pathway.

    Improving urban form, offering better transport options and using other demand management levers to reduce VKT is vital. Most of this reduction needs to happen in our largest towns and cities, where people are more likely to have transport options other than travelling by car. These measures can also deliver significant benefits beyond emissions reductions – such as improving travel choice and accessibility, better health, safety and less congestion.”

    1. I have learned, Robert, that screenshotting or otherwise saving council websites is very important. They “update” them and then you have been gaslit. We have had public meetings advised without a time on them, They have gone back to their website and inserted the times days after the meeting has taken place.

      We are from the (local) government and we are here to help.

  14. Somewhat incredibly, Nicole Rosie actually replied to Kirsty Wild about this on LinkedIn:

    “Kirsty- just touching base to clarify here. These are direct govt funded initiatives with decisions with Ministers rather than Waka Kotahi. Under the caretaker provisions of govt we need to hold off making decisions of this nature that would bind an incoming govt. The current situation is us following required process whilst the govt is formed. We are ready to take these projects forward for discussion with the new Minister once the new govt is formed.”

    & Kirsty replied

    “I’m super happy to hear that you will be advocating for this work. Also, to be fair, the decision on this funding has already been made. It was an allocation in the last Budget. It isn’t waiting on approval anywhere, from a Minister. It was signed off last year. Most of the work within the public sector is directly funded, and we have not seen other Ministries publicly pausing their climate programmes just in case new Ministers wont like them. This is a major setback for emissions reduction, and bitterly disappointing for many.”

  15. There are some classic Ska-Reggae musical references to this behaviour, one step forward, two steps backwards etc.

    No wonder we are so slow, and so far behind the other “developed” nations of the world. We are really just backwater isles in the Pasifika and it appears that agencies and politicians will continue to treat us like the Milk Powder and Residential Property Colony that we have been since Pakeha arrived.

    Nothing changes; nothing changes; nothing changes: the circle of life???

  16. The 20% light VKT “reduction” project had already become window dressing, as it was not a reduction based on current travel , but a reduction based on what travel distances are expected to be in 2035- so it was basically travel being held at current levels…
    (Although if 2035 VKT is eventually higher, it may still be an increase on current levels)

    “Target 1 is based on what we expect baseline VKT to be in 2035, taking into account expected VKT growth of 24 percent by 2035, largely resulting from population growth. It is important to note that this target, while challenging, is equivalent to only a 1 percent absolute VKT reduction compared to 2019 levels. ”

  17. I’ve always believed the whole LGWM process was a stalling tactic until a ‘moar roads’ regime regained the levers of power. Unfortunately for Wellington the motorway to the airport and Petone Grenada link will be very expensive projects for future generations to pay for further entrenching car dependency, probably rammed thru despite local objection.

  18. So walking, cycling and public transport need to be paused to wait for directions but driving does need to? Just another corrupt organisation like Auckland Transport. There is no political will from any major or minor party to do anything about it so nothing will be done. Especially in Auckland. Transport-wise this city is doomed. Wayne Brown won’t be able to bring any change by himself without control over the basics in the city like AT or parking charges. I would be surprised if any meaningful change happens by 2030. Maybe by 2040, who knows. For now if you can it’s better to move somewhere else. At least for vast majority of people. But not everyone has that luxury.

Leave a Reply

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