Kia ora Minister Bishop,
Congratulations to you and the government for your work to secure cross-party support for the National Infrastructure Plan.
It is imperative that you now urgently apply that agreement to the Warkworth to Te Hana project, and to the Roads of National Significance (RoNS) programme as a whole, as they run entirely counter to the plan.
The funding situation, as you know, is untenable.
We have read extensive OIA releases on the unsustainable transport funding situation, which you have acknowledged publicly. They tell a challenging story about how it will be very difficult to afford any of the planned future major projects.
Explicit advice states that even with planned increases to Fuel Tax (and equivalent Road User Charges) of 12c per litre in 2027, 6c per litre in 2028, and 4c per litre in 2029, Warkworth to Te Hana is the only major project that can potentially be funded through the National Land Transport Fund anytime soon.
Additionally, correspondence from the Infrastructure Commission states that building the Roads of National Significance would double the costs of operation, maintenance, and future renewals across the entire State Highway network, which itself already has a book value of $40 billion as of 2022.
With the entire Roads of National Significance programme expected to cost $56 billion, and given all of the other cost pressures on the National Land Transport Fund including other major projects, this is clearly not sustainable.
Warkworth to Te Hana is the white elephant in the room.
In this context, we struggle to understand why the government appears intent on proceeding with a Public Private Partnership (PPP) for Warkworth to Te Hana that could require up to $12 billion of future NLTF funding. To be clear: if you were to proceed, this one project would use up all available funding headroom for any new projects across the entire transport system for the foreseeable future.
Even considered on its own merits, the proposed Warkworth to Te Hana project does not make sense. The business case work states that the project is needed for reasons of safety and resilience, benefits to Northland, and projected traffic volumes. And yet:
- This stretch of corridor is now demonstrably safer than it was, thanks to smaller scale improvements completed through the Dome Valley in 2023.
- Targeted modest resilience improvements could address the remaining concerns more quickly and affordably than the proposed brand new four-lane highway.
- Traffic growth is nowhere near close enough to justify adding an additional four lanes to this corridor, let alone in the form of a whole new highway.
- The proposed project is located entirely in the Auckland region, and doesn’t even reach Northland – and it’s not even the top priority for Northlanders, who would much rather see fixes to the Brynderwyns.
- Nor does Auckland Council want this project as currently designed, either, as clearly stated in their Transport Policy Statement. Proceeding with it will undermine the current work towards a “city deal” and Integrated Transport Plan.
The opportunity cost is too great.
We’re talking about $3.5-4 billion, which over the lifetime of the proposed PPP could potentially rise to up to $12 billion.
Why on earth would you spend all of the nation’s available transport funding on a single project nobody much really wants, to address a problem that’s largely already solved?
Especially when, for a similar level of capital investment you could solve a greater number of critical transport issues over a wider swathe of Auckland and Northland? For example, you could:
- Carry out urgent safety and resilience improvements to the existing SH1 corridor on the south side of the Brynderwyns.
- Deliver targeted and timely improvements to the rest of the current Northern Corridor (such as 2+1s, intersection improvements, town bypasses, and median barriers).
- Accelerate Auckland’s level-crossing programme, to maximise investment in CRL and other rail and road upgrades
- Accelerate the most urgent stages of the Northwest Busway, to relieve congestion and unlock the wider benefits of the improvements to Auckland’s bus and cycle networks.
We appeal to your reputation as a level-headed minister who seeks to make evidence-based and financially responsible decisions.
New Zealand needs commonsense solutions to our most pressing problems. And thanks in large part to your work around the National Infrastructure Plan, we finally have cross-party clarity and agreement on how to assess and prioritise major infrastructure projects.
If you were to now sign the country up to a PPP for Warkworth to Te Hana as currently designed, you would be actively choosing to go backwards, to a highly partisan approach that’s focused on short-term political aims, in contravention of the evidence and against the greater good.
Shackling our transport funding to this one project would also hamstring our ability to pay for necessary transport infrastructure, adapt to climate change, and respond to the increasingly costly impacts of extreme weather across the motu – clear examples of which we see happening around us, as we write.
After decades of political back-and-forth, we finally have the opportunity for genuinely rational cross-party consensus on major infrastructure projects. And right now, the power lies with you to ensure this chance for a better approach is cemented across all areas of government.
Please pause the PPP process for Warkworth to Te Hana, and bring your counterparts to the table for a smarter conversation about how to best maximise our transport investment.
We are trusting you to lead the way, and make decisions that future generations will applaud.
Kind regards,
Greater Auckland
Greater Auckland’s work is made possible by generous donations from our readers and fans. If you’d like to support our work you can join our circle of supporters here.
Header image by Lynn Grieveson (CC) via Newsroom.
Processing...
I know I’ll get roasted, but Warkworth to Te Hana doesn’t seem like that bad a project to me. It replaces the most dangerous and slowest part of the main road to Northland. 4 lanes past there would be crazy though.
Northland is such a nice part of the country, making it more accessible to Auckland would have to improve its economy significantly.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d rather they spent that $4 billion on light rail…
“4 lanes past there would be crazy though.”
That’s why it is a bad project. There is no need, at such huge cost, to TRIPLE capacity (4+2) on such a low volume route. The opportunity cost is way too high. There are many way better balanced solutions.
SH1 in Northland obviously needs improving, but not tripling. This is ideological madness. Duplicating an at times vulnerable and at times unsafe road with double the capacity is wild over-kill.
For a government that is so sure we can barely afford to keep the lights on our hospitals, or to house the most vulnerable, this is extraordinarily lavish platinum-plating.
They seem to lose all judgement over tarmac.
But you would be happy spending $15+ billion putting light rail down dominion road…. With that thinking don’t talk about lights being kept on in hospitals.
I don’t think he’s every been in favour of spending $15+ billion putting light rail down dominion road, in fact I seem to recall a lot of posts saying that was far too expensive and they needed to rescope that project too…
Nice strawman Matthew. The Labour light rail proposal was much maligned on Greater Auckland and far more cost effective approaches for ALR were advocated by the contributors.
$15 billion was the pricetag to put light metro *under* Sandringham Rd.
By all reasonable accounts surface light rail should not cost more than $4 billion
The same also would apply to the Otaki to north of Levin expressway. It had a BCR of around 0.40. Yet it bypasses two sections of state highway with high safety records and have been controversial due to speed limit reversals (now re-reversed under new NZTA rules).
The road realignment was necessary, but the four-lanes just adds hundreds of millions of extra costs.
All this money being spent on the new highway to Levin. Yet as part of the Levin town centre revitalisation project they cannot afford to relocate the current run down station to a better part of town for when the new hybrid trains arrive.
Levin station is in a silly location. It would be much better if located above Queen Street in the heart of the town. Preferably on a double-tracked viaduct.
Very well written letter – big thanks Team GA
As you succinctly put it – thanks for addressing the white elephant in the room – I look forward to Bish’s response & hope this is picked up by media around NZ:
“We’re talking about $3.5-4 billion, which over the lifetime of the proposed PPP could potentially rise to up to $12 billion.
Why on earth would you spend all of the nation’s available transport funding on a single project nobody much really wants, to address a problem that’s largely already solved?
Especially when, for a similar level of capital investment you could solve a greater number of critical transport issues over a wider swathe of Auckland and Northland?”
That’s the thing. Almost all projects are not bad projects if you only look at one side of the ledger. They all do something beneficial, they all make improvements and make things easier.
But only looking at the benefits is fantasising, it’s straight up daydreaming. You gotta look at the cost, the negative impacts, and the opportunity cost of what you don’t do instead. If you want to spend four billion bucks on improving the northland economy, is duplicating the highway in Auckland really the best way to do that?
“If you want to spend four billion bucks on improving the northland economy, is duplicating the highway in Auckland really the best way to do that?”
YES YES YES 1000% YES!
Then why spend it in Auckland?
I second that! Bring on the extension to the mighty North. Northland could be SO MUCH more with a closer, better connection to Auckland and beyond. Imagine telling Northlanders, sorry but the traffic volumes will only justify this road when your grandkids start to drive…Get me wrong, I would not spend $4 on light rail, and put this into a strong road to Northland.
Seems like both you and Jimbo didn’t read the actual post? Nothing in it is against improving the connection to Northland, the objection is that there are better places to target and more cheaply than what is proposed for Warkworth to Te Hana.
Warkworth to Te Hana is also entirely in the Auckland Region. The opportunity cost of doing it likely means nothing else will happen for the foreseeable future in the rest of the route going north.
If we really want Northland to succeed, we need to target solutions on the problematic areas, rather than ramming through an overscoped four laned road that doesn’t address any of the key problems!
@Phil, wanting to cancel this road is quite literally against improving things for Northland. There isn’t better places to target this section of existing road sucks and isn’t fit for purpose it’s an inter-regional connector but only 80kmh (the governments own guide says it should be 100).
@Connor, you really don’t know where to stop lying. “Doesn’t address any of the key problems” DOME VALLEY AND WELLSFORD ARE LITERALLY 2 KEY PROBLEMS!
I personally cannot wait for the government to ram through this road because I’m probably the only one who reads this blog who’s lived in Northland and understands why it’s sorely needed.
Quite frankly I’m sick of Northland getting targeted by Greater Auckland all the time, I read this blog because I’m a somewhat regular train/bus user in Auckland but you guys have written about 20 pieces against this wonderful road. You don’t have to oppose every single thing that makes driving easier and safer just because you’re ideologically anti car.
I know you hate cars Connor but please stop targeting Northland they really need this, you need to spend some time intime Kaitaia or Moerewa and see just how hard it is for people to find jobs we quite literally need to induce demand to head North. And again Connor for a blog that claims it’s evidence based I find it disturbing you’re not putting forward a planned costed alternative.
James, people are not suddenly going to start moving to Kaitaia and starting heaps of businesses there because 230km south you get on the motorway 10 minutes earlier. You cant possibly think it will right?
It’s fine to say you like this project “just because”. You don’t have to try mix in justifications about helping the poor of Moerewa and Kaitaia. If you were given 4 billion dollars, surely you could some up with something that would materially help more northlanders than a short section of expressway in the next province.
@James there clearly is a better place to target, the spot which closes any time there is a major weather event: the Brynderwyns. Maybe we can look at the BCR analysis for the road that NZTA would have prepared and have a rational discussion about it? Except we can’t because they are not releasing that data. I wonder why?
They’ve also so shifted the BCR inputs that what was a 1 a few years ago would need to be about a 3 now. So now a BCR above 1 or even 2 affords little confidence that the benefits really do outweigh the costs.
‘Please give us the entire countries roading budget for one section of our road please and thank you.’
while you’re at it, you should apologise for taking so long to give us all your money
Why only target the Warkworth to Te Hana RoNS? Contracts for about $1.77bn are due to be signed on the 16km Cambridge-Piarere RoNS at the end of the year. Current journey time is only 12min, so there won’t be much of a saving and for safety it’d be much quicker just to complete the lane segregation. Since the roundabout has been built there has been far less congestion and $1.77bn could be much better spent.
12 minutes, possibly blowing out to triple this in holiday season!
oh no! So… 20 minutes congestion on the busiest days of the year? Shock horror!
20 minutes? That’s not congestion. Exeter bypass on a 1960s bank holiday weekend. Now that’s congestion!
holiday congestion should not be given a thought in road upgrades, people have choices on when to travel in the holiday season, if you choose to travel during the busy times, you have yourself and all the others sitting infront/behind you to blame.
if Aotearoa was a civilised country, there’d be a train from Auckland to Whangarei and the Bay of Islands. Hundreds of people a pop going north for the summer holidays.
There are lots of very scary intersections along that short stretch.
Then Tirau is the next big problem, massive queues through there. They really need to get a bypass all the way to the SH5 roundabout or further. I wonder if improving Horahora Road and Old Taupo Road could be an option.
2+1-ing SH2 from Pōkeno to Paeroa (or even Mangatarata roundabout) would be a much better use of funds.
There are bits of this road that have had the 2+1 treatment and they are smooth, safe and modern. Even on public holidays they work fine.
There are other bits, unimproved since they were built which are wiggly, congested and unsafe. On public holidays you see accidents, often nasty ones.
There was a plan to upgrade all of SH2 to this 2+1 standard, but it seems to have vanished from NZTA’s agenda, subsumed by the dogma of: “If it ain’t four lanes, it’s not happening”.
They should bring SH2+1 back to life.
Yes, if the RONS programme was investigating these options for all SH’s across NZ then I’m sure there would be much greater support from all of NZ inc. NZTA have the data, they know the worst safety roads in NZ. Put that evidence into best practice, targeted improvements all over NZ.
The Roads of Notional Significance programme was deliberately created to sidestep NZTA’s usual prioritisation in favour of provincial vote-seeking. Steven Joyce remains a genius.
They had 2+1 on SH1 before the Waikato Expressway. At peak times it was worse than 1+1 as people had to merge.
In my experience 2+1 is the worst possible option, better to stick to what we have.
At peak times (potentially holiday season) yes, then often (especially along SH2 towards Coromandel) the passing lanes get closed temporarily. Peak flow is better and often safer (albeit slower).
90% of the time 2+1 works fine. I’ll say even 95% of the time.
The rationale for 4 laning is also flawed as it will always arrive at the next bottleneck and be congested.
Or use that money to finish the already started Tauranga to Auckland railway line know as the Paeroa–Pōkeno Line.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paeroa–Pōkeno_Line
Well articulated and a strong case for reviewing this project. I agree that a) smaller chunks of money could be spent just on improving the two key pinch points (Dome V and Brynderwyns northbound), and b) the bulk of the money is far better spent elsewhere (in my opinion accelerating the level crossing programme is crucial to keep the city flowing and also enable higher train densities).
The National party say they are better managers of the economy and that they make good decisions that will grow our GDP. But when they are not transparent, hide information and don’t give the benefits and costs of projects then I wonder if they want the best fo NZ.
I’m sick of this anti Warkworth to Te Hana rubbish it seems this blog can’t go a week without moaning about it. (They know it’s going to happen too which is the weird bit) This blog is not in the slightest bit interested in improving things for the north and it shows. They provide no evidence of an alternative just pure reckons, worse still they support evidence based speed limits which means it’ll be a slow 70/30 crawl to the north if this project isn’t built. Suck it up and realise we need this road the north is crying out for this don’t stop it!
Read the article.
Warkworth to Te Hana uses up all the transport money and guarantees that no improvements can be made anywhere else.
It’s like putting all your road impovement eggs in one solid platinum basket.
“uses up all the transport money” – Its less than the CRL
Lol anyway I don’t know why everyone is stressing here about money I’ve got the solution already. We can pay for this entire road and have $1.2 billion left over just by scrapping the ETS component of fuel (we pay about 1.3 billion annually towards the ETS) it’s a scam. We need to invest in ourselves not Paris. New Zealand!
Coatesville Commuter you know full well it doesn’t “guarantee” no improvements anywhere else you just don’t like the fact it might come out of a cycling budget etc. The best strategy for the North is a 120k expressway to Whangarei then realignments and median barriers on SH1/10 north of Whangarei with more passing lanes not less like NZTAs wet dream.
They should levy northland to pay for it, if it’s so important for the northland economy.
Lets see, four billion bucks, 66k households in Northland… thats just $59,000 per household to add on to the rates bill. Spread it over ten years an its only six grand a year per ratepayer.
James, I sincerely hope that the coming crop failures and water shortages, natural disasters and heat waves affect you personally. It would be very karmaic to know that you realise your suffering is the product of your scummy, individualistic, anti-human anti-environmentalist views. Maybe then you’ll develop empathy. Equality in suffering.
@ Riccardo blah blah blah you’ll pay for it just like I will if Northland didn’t have such a crap road there would be more money in the region. But people like yourself enjoy taking money away from improvements to the North and then claiming “there’s just no demand for these roads” repeat cycle until the north is completely broke.
@Burrower YAAAWWNNN. Boring seriously I don’t really care what you have to say the road should be built regardless. Rather than dealing with all that doom and gloom I’ll be driving at 120 on a nice smooth expressway heading north to stimulate the economy and who knows if we get heatwaves that opens up more opportunities for the north’s agriculture!
Get this road built!
correction, James. Rather than “dealing with all that doom and gloom”, you’ll be dead. Starvation, dehydration, thrombosis – take your pick.
Jimbo, Govt has paid 50% of CRL, $2.75b, which is a less than the projected cash cost of W2TH, $4b, and way less than the financialised cost of ~$12b.
Also Auckland, being 40% of the nation’s economy, pays that share of every state project everywhere in the country. So with CRL we pay 50%, plus 40% of the other half, so it is 70% AKl funded!
This unnecessary duplicative indulgence has almost no Northland input. So it really is not a reasonable idea to compare the funding of these projects, or at least not without explaining all that, and thinking about what that means.
It might be less than CRL but that is a tu quoque argument and proves nothing.
James – there has been a reduction in traffic volumes on SH1 through Waipu since 2023 so definitely no induced traffic into Northland.
But yes, there’s a good chance it will go ahead and likely be the final farewell to mega road projects in NZ.
Do you really think it is reasonable to suggest a 4 lane grade separated 10s of billions of dollars expressway from Auckland to Whangarei?
It’s insane how people have lost their grasp on how much money that is. A correctly scaled list of bypassed, median barriers and passing lanes could be delivered in short time for little money in comparison.
Of course. James is a cager, and a tragic example of how enclosing yourself in a metal box on wheels shuts you off from the outside world, your fellow humans, and common sense, where the animal base instinct of selfish speed takes over.
Just like that old cartoon where Goofy turns into a Mr Hyde type monster behind the wheel of his car.
James is right. This motorway is going ahead regardless of this leftwing lobby group.
Carl M – “This motorway is going ahead regardless…” really?
It may do if National / ACT / NZ First get back in, but there is no way it will go ahead if Labour get in.
And guess what Carl ? National et al are not going to get back in ! They’re toast! Badly burned toast ! No jam on burnt toast – it just gets thrown away….
@Finn Yes I do think it’s reasonable. What’s insane is how people like you have lost focus on just how the road is just simply not fit for purpose as an inter-regional connector. If any section needs to be reduced to 80 it’s no longer fit for purpose and needs a replacement.
@Finn all you’re using is reckons there’s no costing, no plans just pure reckons. We have a plan to completely bypass the road and we know it’ll cost about 4 billion. Like I’ve said before it’s a 4 lane highway or nothing. Voters aren’t willing to accept spending $100s of millions to slow themselves down because that’s exactly what you’re proposing. If you add median barriers to the existing corridor there is less room for passing lanes all it’ll take is 1 tractor and we’ve lost thousands in lost productivity just like that. It’s expensive but it’s less than the CRL and will actually save more lives. I look forward to GA writing 20 in depth articles within a month on why we don’t need light rail to the shore when that costs over $4B.
Lol James you cannot be taken seriously – the tractor is probably making the productive trip in your scenario.
$4 billion for a city of 1.7 million is far better value for money compared to $20+ billion for a whole region of 200,000.
But to make it fair, James, if the backwaters “need” a gold plated motorway to the tune of $100,000 per person, then Auckland deserves $170 billion worth of transport investment. Just to be proportionately fair.
It doesn’t matter Greg this road is getting built whether you like it or not. At this point we should be arguing whether or not we wait for the expressway to bypass the Brynderwyns or build a 2 lane bypass round it now ready for all the extra traffic this expressway will bring. Stop the arguments now on Warkworth to Te Hana I know for a fact it’s pretty much set in stone that it’s getting built despite it being overpriced. Suck it up I guess idk?
lol James because it’s apparently impossible for YOU to suck it up, take anger management classes – do something to address this concerning mental health obsession of yours with speed.
You’re all the proof that cars directly cause mental illness.
lol, still deluding yourself that it will induce traffic despite the evidence from the most recent extension to the motorway.
@jezza it induced traffic…. That’s a good thing. Be prepared within the next month or two this will be announced it’s happening I can’t wait for the reactions here it’s going to be halarious. It’s majority rules over evidence and that’s also a good thing. We need to go back to a mob rule set up for everything, its time to not weight evidence into decisions vibes based policies will take centre stage as we move forward with these mega wasteful projects.
in this day and age of low-intelligence bully losers like MAGA and NACT1, its hard to tell if James is a self-aware troll or if he genuinely believes the crap that comes out of his mouth
next he’ll be telling us that we should be feeding plants sports drink instead of water
James – there has been a reduction in traffic volumes on SH1 through Waipu since 2023 so definitely no induced traffic into Northland.
But yes, there’s a good chance it will go ahead and likely be the final farewell to mega road projects in NZ.
I’m not from northland so I don’t have any examples from there.
Yesterday there was flooding across SH1 north of Pukeuri in Otago closing it.
It happens here regularly, and is completely avoidable, the road needs built up by 2 meters and some big culverts put in. A couple million dollars. Very little spend and we would buy apreciable resilience. This won’t happen because all capex from our road taxes are being spent on building and maintaining a couple sections of highway which I might never see.
This is what I mean about NZTA is losing its social license because its spending has become dominated by political pork projects.
looks like there’s been big washouts on SH1 near Kaikoura too.
https://bsky.app/profile/thebasement.nz/post/3mq457glqik25
It’s the worst piece of spending on transport infrastructure in my lifetime, so it’s entirely reasonable for a blog focused on transport in Auckland to be giving it a lot of attention.
A blog that claims it supports road safety while going out of its way to make sure deaths keep happening on the road north. We both know it’s this or nothing. There’s no plan or costing for any alternatives.
Jezza this literally can’t be the worst piece of infrastructure unless you absolutely hate and despise Northland. Explain how a road which shaves a massive amount of time on the trip north while massively improving safety and saving lives could possibly be worse than 300k on a speed bump that got ripped out after a year because the idiots at Auckland Transport forgot we live in a democratic society.
James we know you don’t care about safety. Barriers and passing lanes and targeted deviations would solve safety for so much cheaper, but you’re just a nonce who gets off at the thought of going fast and only gives a shit about “democracy” when it’s you entitled carheads not getting your way 100% of the time anymore
Still clinging to the idea that a road that is entirely in Auckland is what Northland needs.
@jezza yep, we need to induce traffic to head north I’ve heard a rumour it’s going to happen whether or not it’s financially responsible too 🙂 makes me very happy
Soo… we increase spending a little bit in the north but lose money overall. How does that help the Northland economy, if there is less money for other infrastructure like schools, hospitals, or, you know, highways that are actually in Northland?
The 18.5km extension from Puhoi to Warkworth didn’t induce traffic to Northland, so hard to see how a 20km extension from Warkworth to Te Hana is suddenly going to make a difference.
It’s unfortunate as it will likely mean the Brynderwyns stay as they are now for probably two or three more decades.
Lets get it built!
No!
Suck it up snowflake. You can cope with driving slower and safer. Northland would do far better with rail upgrades and investment in local road improvements, not your speed freak boondoggle.
Go book a day at a race track if you sorely need to break the speed limit.
Id have to travel down the goat track to a racetrack in Auckland?
yes. do that. learn patience, carl.
Burrower proving they know absolutely nothing about Northland or even the slightest bit cares.
Borrower let’s lay out what I know about Northland and the drive north given I used to live there. This was far north too close to Kaitaia quite a trip if you need to visit Auckland to do any business.
First things first let’s make it clear we want induced demand for Northland it’s the only way to really help the economy. It was sad in Kaitaia and seeing just how many youths struggle to find work.
You’re a total loony if you think that people in Northland are going to accept let alone comply with a blanket 70kmh max speed limit you’re proposing. In the far north 90 is the MINIMUM speed if you aren’t driving at least that prepare to be abused.
You’re idea of a the train is stupid and wasteful as a very small amount of people would use it and there would be no busses to pick people up when they got there. Northland is rural which you can’t quite understand.
Right now back to the drive the 4 main issues that were most annoying were, Dome Valley, Brynderwyn Hills, the entire section from Puhoi to Warkworth (made worse by NZTA reducing the speed limit) and then the pain of having to slow down through all the towns but Whangarei was the worst as that road could clearly be 60k but it’s a painful 50k crawl because the police are always waiting to pounce on anyone who drifts over the arbitrary 50k limit.
So Burrower you are completely wrong and have no understanding at all of the challenges facing Northland if you lived there for a year you would understand just how important it is we get on and build this thing! No amount of this blog posting is going to change anyone’s mind either it’s happening the existing road has outlived its useful life.
Low intelligence cager raging as usual.
Trains mainly get freight off the road. Fewer trucks, less road wear, less maintenance costs. Or, to put it in terms you’ll understand: ‘no trucks holding me up.’
But with Japanese style 130km/h tilting trains and a proper reconditioning of the North Auckland Line, Auckland to Whangarei (and the Bay of Islands) could be time competitive with the Intercity coach buses by passenger rail.
Yawn. All I hear is an entitled snowflake crying about not being able to put his foot down all the way. As someone who’s taken public transport for years and is very familiar with how hard it is to get around without a car in the car-dependant suburbs – take a hike.
Seriously. Get out of your car, and get some perspective. You’re not oppressed because you have to slow down; public transport users and pedestrians are disadvantaged far more in travel times and yet they suck it up and don’t complain like Larry Smallmember in his lifted vanity ute.
This is a wonderful, reasoned and logical argument. Of course you’re right. Of course what you say makes sense.
But, depressingly, I think you have the politics and political motivations all wrong for this project and other Rons. These projects exist to feed donors and political supporters. They are not being pushed to rationally best improve our transport system or rationally best use limited dollars. They are a way to transfer taxpayers money to groups that supported this govt and to whom they now “owe”. This govt will window dress its motivations as well as it can, but I fear if you don’t see or understand this utterly fundamental driver, then a lot of your excellent logic is mistargeted.
The neglected North needs this motorway.
You need a motorway in the Auckland region more than any other investments in Northland?
A university is a more fitting tool for the future than a 1950s road.
The neglected troll needs his daily feed.
The roads of national significance are possibly not all that important to national voters anyway.
Having driven Warkworth – Te Hana and Cambridge – Piarere a few times recently, I’m happy to see work on them, as they’re unsafe and somewhat frightening, especially with traffic when raining.
4 laning is expensive. Overseas sometimes roads are rebuilt with 4 lanes in mind and modern alignment, but only two constructed initially, saving earthworks, bridges, etc. Not sure if this gets considered as an option in NZ
This is another thing. They are not planning to do work on these old roads, but build whole new parallel bypasses, leaving the old less safe roads in-invested in, to kill locals.
All the money goes on the new RoNS, the current route gets handed over to the cash-strapped local council. Stays in poor condition.
Also if the new route is tolled, likely, then the old route remains used by even more.
Remember, they are not offering to build the Mway any time soon, only to sent out geotech engineers into untamed bush like Lewis and Clark to find out what the geology and soils are like to carve huge chunks out of the hills.
Plenty of money down the drain when they find the construction is unaffordable.
The fair and open option is to put all the RoNS to the NIC, for the same treatment as all the other capital investment projects, and see where any may fit into the NIP. Most could probably be rescoped to be much cheaper and some be worth investment at some time in the Plan. We could then also dump the silly projects that could not be afforded and stop having to argue about them.
Would the donors want their promised election funding back? Or might they support any party that offers to subject these projects to the same rigour as all the others in the NIP?
I think NZTA spending has lost its social license. It is meant to be users pays system, that is the point of fuel taxes and road user charges but it has become so infested with political pork nobody trusts the user pays concept anymore.
Major public works reform is needed in my opinion.
I don’t think we’re quite there yet because all of the unrealistic spend is 1) not happening yet, 2) coming from income tax.
When the planned / needed fuel tax uplifts happen I think that will be the turning point for the social license. Especially in areas which have had large amounts of funding extracted, Canterbury, most of Otago, Southland etc.
Of course because the funding decisions are political, it is likely to continue indefinitely in my opinion. The south island can complain as much as it likes about this extracting cash from poorer regions and spending it on richer ones. But those richer ones are more populous.
Canterbury is the second most populous region in NZ. Our regional transport infrastructure fund is being stolen by other less populous regions. The spending is half the size It should be. This is a theft of $thousands per year. It is ridiculous. I blame both Natonal and Labour and I have contempt for both parties and their cronies in NZTA who facillitate the theft.
This year’s storms and their damages to so many of our absolutely vital regional connections throughout the motu, now gives the Minister a very credible reason to now pivot. Away from just a very few kilometres of trophy road, to increasing the resilience nationwide of our far too many vulnerable locations in our highway network.
+1
There is a profound incompatibility between the current government’s purely political directing of the NZTA regardless of financial prudence, and them currently trying to peddle their now, obviously dubious financial skills for our next election.
4 lanes, Wellsford to Te Hana, bought before the next election, bought on the never never, is financially totally irresponsible. How ever it is packaged.
This section of road is however due some more futher financially responsible improvements. Improvements that will improve safety, but not save the five? minutes per normal trip, that 4 laning could achieve.
Spend wisely Bish. There are a lot more worthy transport projects then this particular boondangle.
There is an Electric Bus from Warkworth to Auckland Central. There is a Te Huia train from Hamilton to Auckland Central.
We need more people living in Auckland Central. Stop building Office Buildings. We do not need more office workers. We need real people, real people that like cities, that like the noise of cities, the football noise, the live music, the theatre, the things that make life lively.
Taamaki is the only real city in this motu, and if you do not like it, go live somewhere else. Noise, sound, and people is what makes life worth living.
In trains and buses and ferries, not in little silly private car things.
We want a city, not a little silly town that thinks it might be a farm.
I just received a card in my letterbox asking for money for National. I have money to stay alive, not money for a silly farmers political party that thinks they can make life better for farmers will some home deserve money from a city person.
National likes farmers money, go ask the farmers for money. In the city we do not have any, thanks to what you have done so far.
Minister Bishop is a Poneke, and he can stay down there. We are a real city, not a silly little political city like Poneke.
When Ngaati Whaatua give this city to Hobson, it was to be the Capital of the Motu. So make us the Capital again!
Also more trains and other useful things, not cars.
bah humbug
A regional return flight between Kaitaia and Auckland is going to set you back $250-$450 and take a little over an hour each way.
A Corolla hybrid will do the same 700km round trip at 4l/100km, 28l, about $90-$100 depending on where you fuel up. It will take over 5 hours non-stop, but you could squeeze in 3 mates and a bit of luggage.
If you cost your time at $50/hour, a solo flight is about the same as the drive, but cram in the family and I can see the sense of taking the car.
The RoNs are only making a small dent in that calculation for anyone who isn’t a haulage firm.
For $4bn could we not get cheaper flights, long term parking at regional airports, and a great rail freight operation?
Maybe we should keep our powder dry for the rollout of flying cars…
but then James et al don’t get their egos stroked feeling like they’re getting billions spent just on their selfish obsession with going faster than is safe or fuel efficient
They love the smell of asphalt in the morning.