2. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) Link to this
to the Minister of Transport
Is it Government policy to build new motorways through New Zealand’s poorest communities?
Hon STEVEN JOYCEWhy then is the National Government currently considering building the Waterview Connection through one of Auckland’s poorest communities—a community that is little able to protect itself from the collective might of the business and road transport lobby, whose interest this Government, like the last one, seems intent on serving?
This Government has a focus on lifting productivity and economic growth for all New Zealanders, and that involves investing in infrastructure that will help achieve that productivity and growth across the country. There are definitely some difficulties with possible options for the Waterview Connection. We understand those problems, and we will seek for the Transport Agency to mitigate those as much as is reasonably possible.
Which option does the Minister prefer: the tunnel that will demolish some houses, halve the playground at Waterview School, and put lots of pollution into the air; the above ground cut-and-cover that will demolish 400 houses and destroy a community; or increased investment in public transport that will actually reduce congestion?
The member is well aware that the Government is making very significant investments in public transport in Auckland, and is supporting about $1.6 billion of investment in the rail system in Auckland. But I point out to the member that a certain amount of reality has to apply. In Auckland around 1 percent of commuters currently use the train, so the best will in the world—even investing the $1.6 billion that the Government has committed—will not make a big dent on the transport requirements of and the transport options for the approximately 86 percent of Aucklanders who travel to and from work by motor vehicle each day.
David BennettThere are big benefits economically of completing the final piece of Auckland’s western ring route, which is why we have designated the whole ring route as a road of national significance. The benefits include reduced congestion and improved travel times for thousands of road users, leading to improved productivity and improved economic growth. For example, morning peak vehicle trips between west Auckland and South Auckland will be reduced by about 20 percent. The heavy traffic that is already on local roads around the Waterview area would also be reduced, to the benefit of the local community.
Hon Darren Hughes Link to this
If it is not Government policy to build motorways through poor communities in Auckland, why has the Minister cut back on future increases to funding for public transport that was proposed by Labour—public transport projects that would have helped rich and poor communities alike?
The public transport investment has not been changed at all from what was proposed by the previous Government. Although the actual public transport services subsidy is not growing as quickly as proposed under the previous Government, it is, nevertheless, growing very quickly indeed.
Why is the Minister persisting with the Waterview Connection, a project with a benefit-cost ratio of only 1:1.15, when his own ministry has recommended a suite of road safety and public transport projects in the Auckland region with benefit-cost ratios 3 to 4 times greater than that of the Waterview Connection, and with a much lower price tag?
I share the member’s concern about the cost-benefit ratio of the twin two-lane tunnels proposed by the previous Government. The cost estimates for that project were extraordinarily high, and that is why I have asked officials to consider ways to save costs. We are still working through the final decision on that.
John BoscawenHow can the Government even contemplate spending an additional $2 billion over and above the alternative ground level route when the country is in the grips of recession and we need desperately to reverse the decline in our living standards?
I think the questions of both honourable members show the challenges that face the Government in making a decision on this project. It is, of course, important that we complete this project economically and cost-effectively, but it is also important that, as much as possible, we maximise the mitigation to the local community—that is the balance that both the Transport Agency and the Government will have to achieve.
Is the Minister, therefore, saying that his Government is bound by the previous Labour Government’s ideological commitment to build either of the Waterview Connection options despite the meagre benefit over cost, despite Treasury’s advice, despite the Transport Agency’s advice, and despite the stated transport priorities of the Auckland region itself? Why is he persisting with this project?
I have to say that I find that question interesting as it comes from somebody who so strongly supported the survival of the previous Government. I think the important point to make is that there are real benefits from completing the western ring route in Auckland, but those projects must be done as cost-effectively as possible while, as I say, balancing the environmental and community concerns.
Hon Darren Hughes Link to this
What is the minimum number of homes that the Minister will accept have to be knocked down if he decides to abandon Labour’s twin-tunnel solution for the Waterview Connection?
The Government is currently reviewing the options, and the final decisions will be made via the Transport Agency. I point out to the member that there are no easy solutions in this regard. The tunnel option favoured by the previous Government affected some 152 properties in the area. Properties will always be affected by the completion of this route. It is not an easy decision.
How can it be a priority of this Government to build a $3 billion tunnel for the Waterview Connection when there are long waiting lists for cataract, coronary, and hip replacement operations? Indeed, how could this decision take more than just a few seconds to make?
The Government has not yet indicated its support for a twin two-lane tunnel option. The previous Labour Government raised expectations regarding the very expensive tunnel option, which I must point out was unfunded and unrealistic. That project was expected to cost $2.77 billion. It is unfortunate that the previous Government saw fit to raise the expectations of the local community without providing any funding for the project.