Hope everyone is enjoying the summer so far – here is a bunch of stuff that we found interesting from the last week.
This Week in Greater Auckland
- On Monday, Matt collated the summer cycling stories we couldn’t fit into the roundup last week.
- On Wednesday Connor celebrated all the nice things that happened in 2025, and asked what’s next.
This roundup, like all our work, is brought to you by the Greater Auckland crew and made possible by generous donations from our readers and fans.
We’re now a registered charity, so your donations are tax-deductible. If you’d like to support our work you can join our circle of supporters here.
Can we get better climate action in New Zealand?
Great opinion piece by Jessica Palairet from Lawyers for Climate Action NZ on the need for credible action on climate change in 2026, and the role lawyers can play in pushing for it. Excellent to see a mention of the benefits of lower-emissions transport, and we hope to see some good policies around this in the election this year.
Every dollar spent trying to find and subsidise more gas in New Zealand would be better spent investing in renewable energy. We know that New Zealand could have an abundant supply of renewable energy now with existing technologies. In contrast, the Government’s own evidence suggests that the best-case scenario for new gas discoveries wouldn’t yield results until the mid-2030s. By then, global demand for fossil fuels will be collapsing as other countries accelerate their clean energy transitions.
Meeting our climate obligations, which include to “use all means at [our] disposal” to prevent significant harm to the climate”, doesn’t have to come at the expense of New Zealand’s economic interests. In fact, when we start thinking about climate policies in terms of their wider costs/benefits – whether it’s the health benefits of promoting active and low-emissions transport, or the cost of living benefits of electrification – stronger climate policy and economic outcomes often sit hand-in-hand.
Reporting on the RoNS files
BusinessDesk has picked up on the files we got back via OIA late last year, on the nature of the advice around the government’s giant plan for More RoNS. There’s nothing particularly new in the reporting, but it’s great to see it being picked up by other media outlets. And it’s always good to see our work to shed daylight on the big issues being explicitly recognised!
The Government’s transport plans for the coming 20 years will cost more than a quarter of a trillion dollars, the Transport Ministry says.
Transport Minister Chris Bishop was provided with this more than $250 billion estimate for all projects, including 17 Roads of National Significance (RoNS), a second Auckland Harbour crossing, and a Northwest Busway in a Ministry of Transport briefing in August.
The briefing, now publicly released by the ministry, informed a speech Bishop gave weeks later in which he said “hard choices” needed to be made, as “not everyone is going to get what they want, exactly when they want it”. Bishop declined to comment beyond what he said in his October speech when contacted on Tuesday. ‘Complex and expensive’The August briefing had been asked for by Bishop’s office in May and was titled, “Detailed report back on the Roads of National Significance Programme”. A heavily redacted version of the document was publicly released by the ministry last week, but was earlier released to transport blog Greater Auckland under the Official Information Act.
A welcome safety change
From The Conversation, a report on a return to safer user-interfaces for the people at the wheel of the large speeding machines on our roads:
In recent years, the way drivers interact with cars has fundamentally changed. Physical buttons have gradually disappeared from dashboards as more functions have been transferred to touchscreens.
Touchscreens in vehicle dashboards date back to the 1980s. But modern cars consolidate functions into these systems far beyond what we’ve seen before, to the point where a car feels mostly like a computer.
This may create the impression of a modern, technologically advanced vehicle. However, scientific evidence increasingly points to touchscreens compromising our safety.
In fact, ANCAP Safety, the independent car safety assessment program for Australia and New Zealand, has announced that from 2026 it will ask car manufacturers to “bring back buttons” for important driver controls, including headlights and windscreen wipers. Similar moves are underway in Europe.
ANCAP Safety will explicitly assess how vehicle design supports safe driving, and not just how well occupants are protected in the event of a crash – which means calling time on touchscreens that control everything in your car.
…..
How distracting are touchscreen features, really?
Perhaps the clearest and most accessible evidence to date comes from a 2020 UK study conducted by TRL, an independent transport research company.Drivers completed simulated motorway drives while performing common in-car tasks. These included selecting music or navigating menus using touchscreen systems such as Apple CarPlay and Android Auto.
Performance was compared against baseline driving with no secondary task, as well as voice-based interaction.
When drivers interacted with touchscreens, their reaction times increased markedly.
The Housing Market in Action
From The Post, a story about the current rental market and how tenants can make the best of it (what it doesn’t go into is the financial and emotional cost of moving house, if the negotiations don’t go satisfactorily):
It’s not often housing policy expert Stuart Donovan sees the housing market in action in person.
But he and his partner are in the process of moving after asking for a rent reduction and being told no.
So by the end of the month they will be moving to their new home – and their landlord is now advertising for a new tenant – at a lower rent.
Donovan and his wife moved from Brisbane a year ago and found a home they liked in Island Bay. The rent was $1250 a week and they liked the house and the area.
But when it came to renew the tenancy he asked for the rent to be dropped – by $50.
…..
“We said would you be able to consider the rent in line with market conditions but their answer was no. We were a bit sad, so we thought we’d have a look at what was available.”
…..
Now the Island Bay property is back on the rental market at $1100.
“We would have been looking at re-signing for two or three years. They refused to negotiate and now have to re-let the place and there are costs associated with that,” Donovan said.
How about some due diligence?
From Stuff, the story of a developer who’s regretting choices made about developing in a highly floodable area outside Napier. (Spoiler: the judge sided with Council).
A developer who created a 36-lot residential subdivision near Napier says two councils failed in their duty of care by allowing the subdivision to go ahead.
David Colville and two of his companies were involved in the purchase and development of the Tangoio Beach Settlement, 20km north of Napier.
The site’s previous owner had been granted a private plan change request in 2008, which saw it rezoned to “coastal settlement residential”.
Colville was granted resource consent from Hastings District Council to create the subdivision in April 2019.
…..
Colville said his company had lost the value of its development through no fault of its own and had no means of obtaining compensation.
The councils said they did not owe the company a duty to ensure the development was commercially successful.
Bike-through
From Stuff, a weirdly inspiring story of a vision achieved:
“Totally savage” – that is how Christchurch man Matthew Fairbrother described his mission to cycle around a McDonald’s drive-thru for 24 hours.
The 21-year-old, who has been cycling for 10 years, completed the challenge on Christmas Day, the only day of the year McDonald’s is closed.
Fairbrother managed to ride 500km, completing each lap of the McDonald’s Riccarton drive-thru in around 25 seconds.
…..
Speaking to Stuff, Fairbrother described the challenge as “pointless,” but he did it anyway, with a strong focus on mental discipline rather than speed.
Ferry Annoying
It feels like the inter-island ferry chaos is only intensifying, with private provider Bluebridge now having issues. As a reminder, the replacement ferries that the current coalition government cancelled were due to be delivered this calendar year.
Passengers on board Bluebridge’s Cook Strait ferry Livia remained delayed in port for more than three hours after their 1.30pm departure time, as the company called for volunteers to disembark the overbooked ferry.
A number of passengers messaged Stuff voicing their frustrations after the ship was stuck in Wellington on Sunday due to being overbooked by 64 people.
…..
On Thursday, passengers aboard Connemara were stuck for 15 hours as workers tried to resolve an issue with the winch that controls the stern door.
Videos and social posts to check out
Another “setback” for self driving cars, but not the worst thing in the world given all the problems they bring along with them.
Self-driving gets pushed back yet again. We're not going to solve car dependency with robots; we need to provide more alternatives to driving – and discourage avoidable car use – especially for the enormous number of short, single-occupant trips
— Prof. Ian Walker (@ianwalker.bsky.social) 2026-01-14T14:57:36.183Z
A great example of how prioritising access helps to make European transport systems more useful. In Auckland, we have the same issues as Toronto – even for things like our rail stations, where many only have one one access point.
One thing that really strikes me about people who shallowly argue for trams in N-America is how little they realize that the way we manage traffic here will seldom produce the level of ease of access they experience in European trams and long forExample: accessibility of stops, Paris vs Toronto
— Marco Chitti (@chittimarco.bsky.social) 2026-01-14T21:47:35.070Z
Some useful comms from Melbourne about the changes to services about to happen on their rail services, when the new metro tunnel goes into full operation next month. Maybe something for AT to learn from?
And in rail news from overseas, a topic suggestion from an overseas reader – and something for us to aspire for here in Aotearoa – is the new Koralmbahn high speed line in Austria. Check out this great video about it:
That’s it from us! Enjoy your weekend!
Processing...
Having just returned from a quick South Island road trip, I feel stupidly lucky to have missed the ferry chaos. Came over from wgtn on the Connemara just before the ramp issue, and by chance our return trip was on the Livia. Normally the ferry stuff is just something abstract I read about in the news, so actually having to rely on them made me realise how precarious the situation is a lot of the time. I really feel for those who are left shouldering some big costs, like accommodation and having to store a vehicle (not to mention the emotional distress of having to spend several days in Picton).
Picton is not bad. It has a great 2nd bookshop and a very well stocked general hardware store. We enjoyed both on our way through a week ago also just missing the ferry disruptions.
The whole ferry saga shows the appointment of a Minister for the South Island was a total sham. We haven’t heard a peep from the man standing up for the needs of South Islanders since Nicky No Boats blew up the entire new ferry process rather than just fix the on shore planning.
This morning’s Post has a paywalled article saying that Luxon has made a captain’s call and watered down Bishop’s Auckland intensification plans.
Anyone have any more info?
https://www.thepost.co.nz/nz-news/360931482/controversial-auckland-intensification-plans-could-be-watered-down
We must protect the heritage character of the inner suburbs at all costs.
Why should we destroy it solely to subsidise NZ’s fake tertiary credentials industry?
What are you implying, that only foreign students live in the central isthmus? Or only they live in higher density housing?
Herald has a paywalled column today. Both say the government will drop drop plans to force Auckland Council to change zoning rules to allow another two million homes to be built over the next 30 years. The U-turn is described as a win for Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown but also for National, since it denies Act, New Zealand First and Labour a potent issue on which to raid the blue vote.
Bishop confirmed “the Government is considering a range of options around housing capacity targets for Auckland and as Minister of Housing I will have more to say soon.”
“Bishop confirmed “the Government is considering a range of options around housing capacity targets for Auckland and as Minister of Housing I will have more to say soon.”
How about more housing in Sydney to deal with young Aucklanders leaving? I think this would be a reasonable response. Maybe we could subsidise apartments there for Kiwis with our taxes? It would fit into the “anywhere but here” logic of anti-intensification.
I have a bridge to sell you if you think that offering cramped, overheated and poorly appointed infill houses to young people for about $800,000 is going to stop emigration to Australia.
The reason for much of the shift is that they can’t buy the types of houses that they grew up in because they’re too unaffordable.
The reason they’re unaffordable is because they get outbid by arriveste property developers and converted into micro-sections to feed the needs of the immigrants who are (without intending to) destroying the conditions that support our way of life.
Its not the only story driving the young overseas, the place is boring (being burdened with a top-heavy civil service keen to denegrate ordinary Kiwis and to stop people from enjoying themselves).
What are you taking about Dr. Spin? Ah yes, spin and miss-information as you name implies.
As a kiwi overseas, it’s our cost of living, expensive groceries, poor pay, cold houses built “back in the day”, insecure work, poor pay and low productivity that sends us off shore, often never to return.
Many of the property speculators you talk about are those kiwis born between WW2 and the early 1970s, too selfishly lining their own pockets to see the problems most kiwis have. I get the impression that you too are part of that group.
Here’s an archive version of the article. Makes me want to bang my head against the wall. The same nimby / vested interest arguements as always. https://archive.ph/Spp4r
I don’t find thousands of 2 story, tightly packed houses spread over several km of land very attractive. Most have no view and are surrounded by 2 or 3 or 4 parked cars on narrow streets, driveways and berms.
Most people don’t care about a view, they would rather have a warm, dry and affordable place to live
The problem is we’re upzoning, but also still car dependent. If we keep our current combination of somewhat bold upzoning, and timid transport policy then yeah the result will really suck. This is indeed already really obvious from what is being built now.
For example, the North Shore is starting to hit the limit of how many people can live there if everyone keeps driving everywhere. The public transport network isn’t terrible but it is a long way from something you could use to casually go to most places. You could argue that yeah well it is lower density than the isthmus, but (1) is is not a particularly dense area anymore, and (2) the public transport network came there first anyway.
Back of the envelope sketch here:
wrongsideofmycar.blogspot.com/2022/03/the-isthmus-buses-really-are-better.html
And bicycling, well AFAIK there’s nothing in the planning pipeline at all for the rest of this decade. We’re not going to make it like that.
Also in the NZH “U-turn season starts with housing intensification – Matthew Hooton”
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/economy/u-turn-season-starts-with-housing-intensification-matthew-hooton/premium/K66JS3KNLREBPDX7XEBUXTVS5U/
Brilliant. Luxon pipes up after the PC120 consultation closes. So AC now have to assess the submission and also take account of late change of mind from the Govt.
Give him a break, he hadn’t read the report and it’s not something he was aware of…until he was told he could lose votes.
So like “Getting NZ back on track” their last election promise of “Putting the local back into Local Gvernment” was just a meaningless election ploy to them. I hope instead the electorate measures their performance against these slogans, later this year.
“Back on Track”
We are further off the track, in the economy, our productivity, our standard of living, and service provision, even our inter-island transport links, are all far worse then they were two years ago.
“Putting the Local back into Local Government”
Instead we have had increased Central Government interventions to Local Government decision-making, in everything from local fuel tax removal, speed table removals, speed limit reversals, and now town planning.
“National Interest” is very much the narrow National Party interests, rather then the broader interests of our Nation.
I’ll be drinking Lindaur in my early 1990’s inner Kingsland Villa in celebration this evening.
Its NZ’s immigration driven population increase that is mostly responsible for high housing costs. It angers me that Kiwis are expected to permit the wholesale destruction of very the fabric of our towns and cities en masse to house them (whilst paying a greater portion of their discretionary income due to the resulting speculation).
Perhaps if our politicians and policy wonks had specifically obtained the country’s consent beforehand …
I look forward to a better plan that increases population density without granting carte blanche to the greediest of New Zealand’s (mostly imported) slum developers.
Kingsland, a suburb which has seen a net decrease in population in recent years, sitting alongside one of the most well served by both bus and train public transport corridors in the city? Kingsland, which will be within minutes of the CBD once the CRL opens this year? Nice, definitely a great win for the average Aucklander.
I have a suspicion that this political football will be tossed around through consultation and committee for many years to come while the average commute increases in time and distance.
You’ll note that this guy isn’t an “average Aucklander”. He’s a millionaire beneficiary of NIMBYism and he’s literally laughing at everyone else from a pedestal of privilege. These people have never been shy that the basis of their politics is “I’ve got mine, I’m going to keep it, screw you poors”
There is plenty of room for well considered intensification in Kingsland.
The issue with PC10 was that it wouldn’t be considered intensificiation at all (the fact that it was conceived by arbitrarily working backwards from the ludicrous population figure of 2,000,000 illustrates this).
As a reminder, we tried this carte blanche approach already with the MDRS.
The result was that the building industry collapsed in the face of market oversupply.
Quality developers like Ockham were particularly affected and have only survived because the Government stepped in to underwrite their debts.
The PC10 change would have repeated this mistake on a much larger scale.
Making Auckland unrecognisable in the process and creating infrastructure problems that would last for generations.
I’d struggle to think of a better plan to increase population density than one that encourages development around an inner-city station soon after the opening of the CRL.
At least you’ve outed yourself as an ‘I’ve got mine, bugger everyone else’, so no-one will fooled by any future claims you might be thinking of other people’s concerns.
Population density for its own sake doesn’t make for a very persuasive argument.
If that’s all you were interested in then you may as well just move to some fly-box in the CBD and count yourself the happiest person in the City.
So forgive me for celebrating the demise of a gormless, ill-considered and bitter proposal for the destruction of Central Auckland.
While its a pity more people can’t live in a place as well appointed as Kingsland. PC10 would simply destory it without building on any of its qualities that could be preserved (or even enhanced). Vulture capitalism at its worst.
The sustainable (and acceptable) solution to this lies in sensitively increasing density through good planning; whilst simultaneously adjusting immigration settings which have until recently supercharged this country’s tendency towards property speculation.
Thing is that old mate Spins here started drinking his “Lindaur” too early lol:
“It was understood this would not affect housing intensification around major public transport hubs, like the Auckland City Rail Link (CRL) that is due to open later this year.”
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/584254/auckland-councillors-in-the-dark-over-government-s-housing-intensification-rethink
“If that’s all you were interested in then you may as well just move to some fly-box in the CBD and count yourself the happiest person in the City.”
I feel seen (Well, not sure what a fly-box is supposed to be but I’m very happy in my nice apartment).
You don’t own other people’s properties.
You shouldn’t get to tell me what I can do with my own property. If you agree to that I’ll agree not to tell you what colour your car should be.
Like telling me I cannot burn rubbish in my suburban backyard, or telling me that I am responsible for all the slash from harvesting my forestry block in Te Tairawhiti
One of our most pressing infrastructure problems seems to be exactly that we housed a whole lot of people in outer suburbs like Westgate, without much transport infrastructure, instead of in central areas like Kingsland.
I thought National cared about efficiency and productivity. All that work for nothing, just because Nats changed their mind
How is this going to encourage people to use public transport after flagging numbers- and in the year of CRL?
The cost of on-street parking, and AT-managed car parks, will rise by 50 cents an hour across the region from February 1 — unless the area already had a price change in the past year. Public transport fares will also increase by an average of 5.1%.
For adult commuters, this means a 10 to 25 cents increase per bus or train trip, and 40 to 60 cents more per ferry journey.
AT fare increase detail;s https://at.govt.nz/bus-train-ferry/fares-discounts/public-transport-fare-changes
The reason that the Bluebridge’s new ferry is having issues is because we cannot get quality fuel.
The reason we cannot get quality fuel is because we must source it from unscupulous overseas suppliers.
The reason we’re forced to do this is because the previous Labour government stupidly decided to allow the decommissioning of the refinery at Marsden.
This was a strategic blunder made on the spurious notion that New Zealand’s actions can have even the faintest impact on the Green House Effect.
Never mind the fact that shipping in refined fuel generates more CO2 emmissions then if we had refined it ourselves.
Its reassuring at least that the current government realises that it isn’t a good idea to pointlessly beggar ourselves.
As a lawyer, I look forward to obstructive members of my profession having less of a say in New Zealand’s infrastructural and economic development.
Do you mind explaining how exactly the quality of the fuel influenced the issue with the ramp and the blunder of overbooking the next ferry?
Well you see the poor quality and dastardly foreign diesel fumes clouded the poor brains of the seamen working the boats and they forgot how to raise and lower the ramp and also forgot how many people were meant to be onboard.
Sure, a ramp door was impacted by poor quality fuel… looks like you might have settled into that Lindauer well before the evening.
So you’re claiming that a ship called Livia was poisoned?
Marsden point was a private company, and its directors decided to close the refinery. Labour didn’t “stupidly decide to allow” as the only possible thing the government at the time could have done was offer a bailout or subsidy – something more out of National’s playbook if anything.
The Crown (via Parliament) can do whatever it likes – including interfere in private property rights when it s in the strategic interests of the Country to do so.
Its the doctrine of ‘radical title’ – the idea that all land ownership ultimately derives from the Crown (an idea reflected in its ability to sieze land under the Public Works Act; for example).
Its entirely correct to say that the last Labour Government ‘allowed’ Marsden to be shut down. The fact that it was privately owned is a non-determinative factor.
So your argument is that because the Crown can seize land, it should have subsidized the Marsden Point refinery? Or buy it and make it a public asset?
How would that help the fuel quality? How would better fuel quality have prevented the Bluebridge ferry’s ramp failing?
Is this a parallel argument to that:
Councils should provide car parking for motorists on public land at no more then any cost of administering any fee gathering.
So here the Government should have stepped in to provide motor vehicle fuel to motorists at no more then their costs to source and refine it.
And I thought you were a private enterprise advocate, not a rabid socialist
A bit of spin there.
The Connemara and Livea are near sisters from the same Italian Ship Yard and both are listed as being powered by two MAN/B&W engines of 10800kw each. So most likely the same model.
And diesel powered ships all around our coast are having propulsion issues caused by unsatisfactory fuel? nah.
But what is undeniable is a capacity shortfall across the straits, one that will be with us for some years yet. A period made longer by our finance minister making an impetuous huge costly mistake.
I still can’t believe she paid people to not build us ships. I could could not build ships for half the price.
The capacity question is an interesting one – if there is more demand than supply, then why is Bluebridge not investing in a third vessel ? They aren’t running crossings as a public service after all.
I think there is probably sufficient capacity for the most part, but what we lack is any redundancy in the system. With both operators being profit driven, neither will (for quite rational reasons) put a few hundred million into a backup vessel. With 3 or more operators you might get enough consistently spare capacity to avoid a vessel breakdown having massive cascading effects, or another solution would be for the government to purchase a spare vessel that could be leased out short term to either company as needed. Whether this is a cost taxpayers want to soak up is another question.
Not many comments about the distraction levels of various in-car activities. I’ve seen a lot of advertising that focuses on huge screens with lots of capabilities set in the driver’s eyeline and reach, so long as they’re not actually driving the car. The sort of secondary activities that in a warplane would be delegated to a second crew member.
There are very few actual control changes that need to be the driver’s responsibility when moving. It might be a bit boring for the ads, the showrooms and the ‘our model has more than your model’ competition for buyers, but having reached a peak of automatic transmission, simple buttons and automated driver assistance, the push back to more ‘screen time’ when driving isn’t going to be that good for road safety.
Eyes and brain on the road, with a bit of soothing music (not too soothing) in a comfortable, safe car might be dull to some minds but it will make for less mistakes – many of which can still kill or badly injure people.
My Volvo Ex30 only has a large central touch screen (with no dials above the steering wheel) plus lights and washer controls on stalks. Annoyingly Volvo keeps updating the display software and moving the haptic controls around so as soon as a button press becomes a natural action, I have to unlearn it and learn over again. This is very distracting especially on windy roads BUT my adaptive cruise control keeps me a lot safer then people in older cars playing with their phones, wearing headphones, face timing, waiting films etc.
all of the above ruins their general awareness much more and I witness it all on a daily occurrence on London’s M25, M4 and M40 motorways where it often causes incidents.
Yeah a lot of products just aren’t designed anymore to make driving without distraction possible. I was travelling last year by car as the passenger and Google Maps navigation was open in Android Auto. It really liked to display pop-up dialogs that covered the map and the lane guidance. If you’re driving alone that means that instead of just glancing at the map, you have to go and look for the close button and then glance at the map.
Yes. I don’t suppose NZ is interested in leading the world in disabling these screens, but that would be nice. An appropriate piece of legislation might be a requirement to reconfigure the vehicles by an appropriate date, eg 2030 or 2035. If this leads to vehicles having to be scrapped, the silver lining would be removing these often heavy, high-emissions vehicles from our roads.
I for one am sick of the flip flopping on planning. And it’s mainly because of extreme positions, which are simply not sustainable.
Fact is, we can enable intensification in targeted areas AND keep quite a lot of special character. It doesn’t need to be either / or.
It’s become such a frustratingly polarised issue.
Proponents of ultra density, such as this website, are as guilty as the extremist NIMBYs.
Everyone needs to grow up FFS and realise that there needs to be balance and compromise.
I agree. I’ve lived in Auckland close to 40 years and have always lived in attached housing or apartments – but they were older ones with a bit of land and well designed. I’m a fan of density, but with a few more controls than what we have at the moment, where there are some large areas of housing packed in with little or no green space. Research has shown cities with insufficient trees and greenary are hotter and we don’t want this when we have global warming.
I think if we did density better we would have a lot less push back from NIMBY’s. Quality masterplanned developments can work well – like Broadway Park in Newmarket, Hobsonville Point, and Stonefields.
I spoke to a number of people at the PC120 event in Meadowbank, and most agree we need it, but they are also after something better than what is being delivered by the “vulture capitalists” (great term someone used above!).
Until this “better density” wants to go in next to them. Then all bets are off.
Respectively, I think they are playing you.
Ultra density only occurs when land availability is rationed. Either by natural geograhic features, or by the artificial barriers of restrictive zonings.
Upzoning wide areas increases the choices available for new builds. The more available choices, the lower the land price premiums that can be extracted. This then lowers the land cost component of the new builds to provide for an increased population. It does not alter the demand for new housing, it just means that there is more choice as to where the same amount of new housing can be located.
Some of us stand to benifit tremendously from any artificially created scarcity land price premiums. Well perhaps our offspring will. But this comes at the expense of the masses that just need affordable safe housing located in convenient locations. We should be better catering for their needs ahead of artificially maintaining price privilege by restrictive zoning.
“Ultra density”.
Most cities would scoff at this. Its not proposing Hong Kong II….
Artificial high land price by restricted supply was the founding principle of NZ colonial land laws. Still being played by banks and ‘vulture capitalists’ at the expense of anyone wanting a place to live.
Yes. That’s at the heart of it.
Learn from Melbourne comms? I hope there is some easier way on their web site to get info, rather than that bewildering word dump. I only got that there’s a new line and lots of services are changing, so everyone needs to find their new connections. Only first-time passengers will know what they are doing, when they plan their first journeys. The message seemed to be: Everyone else should panic because they have been warned that there is so much change that they won’t know how to use the system.
I thought the McDonalds challenge might have been intended to raise awareness of the problem that McDonalds won’t serve people on bikes in the drive-thru lane. Which means they won’t serve people on bikes when the restaurant doors are shut. Given the slow speed environment, the policy cannot be defended on ‘safety’ grounds.
A2B now only to finish in 2041?
https://at.govt.nz/projects-initiatives/south-auckland-projects-and-initiatives/airport-to-botany-rapid-transit-project