Loads of roads programme is dinosaur thinking

The ‘loads of roads’ National Land Transport Programme will mire New Zealand in an outdated 1950s approach to transport and do nothing to protect us from rising oil prices, climate change, or the obesity epidemic.

Green Party MP Sue Kedgley welcomed an increased focus on developing walking and cycling infrastructure but criticised the lack of funding available for sustainable transport.

“As I expected money is being poured into loads of roads but very little is being spent on sustainable transport options such as buses, ferries, walking and cycling, rail and sea freight,” Ms Kedgley said.

More than half the $8.7 billion budget goes into state highways, so local roads, regional roads, public transport and road safety will suffer by comparison, Ms Kedgley said.

“This is the biggest transport budget in New Zealand history and will have a lasting effect on how New Zealanders travel for many years. It’s tragic that for every $7 spent on road projects only $1 will be spent on public transport.”

“It is especially disturbing to see almost no funding going into rail and sea freight - we have to shift our freight to these modes or else risk serious damage to our economy when the price of oil rises,” Ms Kedgley said.

“It is almost incomprehensible that there’s no recognition of peak oil in the programme. All the predictions are instead based on Treasury figures that don’t acknowledge the reality of rapidly rising oil prices.”

The funding structure of state highways vs local roading and public transport projects is an uneven playing field, with the odds firmly stacked against public transport projects going ahead, Ms Kedgley said.

“It is deeply disappointing that the fundamental imbalance in the way state highways and public transport are funded has not been addressed.”

This is because state highways are 100 percent funded by the New Zealand Transport Authority, while local authorities have to provide at least half the money for public transport and local roads, and apply for the rest, which makes them less likely to invest in such projects.