11. Question No. 11—TransportHon JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green) to the Minister of TransportQuestion No. 11—Transport11. Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green) to the Minister of Transport: Does he stand by his statement that Investment in green transport options is a triple win for climate action – it reduces traffic congestion promotes a healthy active lifestyle and clears up the air around us"; if so how does that factor into his consideration of options for mass rapid transit in Wellington?Hon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Transport): Yes. Mode shift is one of the key investment objectives of the Let's Get Wellington Moving programme and the various options that have been put forward for mass rapid transit will be considered against that and other objectives.Hon Julie Anne Genter: What is his response to Dr Ralph Chapman that the Let's Get Wellington Moving options which include $2.2 billion in new road tunnels will come with a large quantity of embedded carbon emissions and will also induce more traffic?Hon MICHAEL WOOD: I would note a couple of things. One is that one of the road tunnels that I believe is being referred to there within options one and two of the Let's Get Wellington Moving programme is in fact a road tunnel that will be primarily used for bus rapid transit. Secondly I would note that by definition any investment in hard transport infrastructure will carry with it embedded carbon emissions. The key point is to consider the overall outcome that is achieved and I'm confident that across all of the options that are up for consideration—which have not been decided upon yet—there will overall be carbon savings through a shift to high-quality public transport walking and cycling.Hon Julie Anne Genter: Can he confirm the analysis shows the majority of time savings for buses from the eastern suburbs is achieved by the bus priority measures also included in option four not the $2.2 billion in road tunnels in options one and two?Hon MICHAEL WOOD: Across the various options there are a range of configurations. My understanding is that some benefits are achieved by both of them. In respect of the additional tunnelling options around the Basin Reserve that are part of options one and two there are a range of benefits including some time savings for public transport but more generally a better urban form and also I would note better and safer walking and cycling options for Wellington commuters.Hon Julie Anne Genter: Can you confirm the analysis shows the proposed $2.2 billion for new road tunnels will save only 1.5 minutes for a car travelling from Johnsonville to the airport at peak time and even less for those travelling from the eastern suburbs to the city centre compared to option four which is the most climate-friendly option?Hon MICHAEL WOOD: All of the options have different trade-offs within them. I do just need to note that I think the characterisation of a bus rapid transit tunnel through Mount Victoria as "a road tunnel" doesn't really characterise the benefits that are carried with it. There are a range of different benefits which cut across all of the different options. One of the things that I would note—bearing in mind that decisions have not yet been made—is that we will need to consider also the degree of additional housing that is enabled by the different options which is a benefit in and of itself but also that if that is maximised there are potentially longer-term carbon savings from reduced emissions from that more intensified housing model.Hon Julie Anne Genter: Is he aware that with the money saved from going with the most climate-friendly option—option four—we could build bus rapid transit to Karori with significant time savings for bus users from the northern suburbs as well as the time savings from the bus priority measures in option four for those from the east and south?Hon MICHAEL WOOD: As I've noted in previous answers the trade-offs are complex between options—for example the broader Let's Get Wellington Moving programme as a part of the City Streets programme is indeed creating better bus access to a range of suburbs around Wellington. It is true that there are a range of costs across options one to four for mass rapid transit but there are also a range of different benefits between those projects that we need to carefully balance up and consider.Hon Julie Anne Genter: Will he promise to current and future New Zealanders to fully apply the goals and initiatives in the emissions reduction plan to the Government's recommended option for Let's Get Wellington Moving?Hon MICHAEL WOOD: Yes. The emissions reduction plan is Government policy and something that we give great priority to. We will be considering that as we consider the best options to take mass rapid transit in Wellington forward as we will be considering the investment objectives. I note that there was a 40 percent weighting on the mode shift objective within the Let's Get Wellington Moving programme. Again I would just note to the member that none of these choices and trade-offs are necessarily as simple and didactic as saying it's "A versus B"; the trade-offs are often very complex. For example as I said before in a previous question the ability to significantly uplift urban housing along this corridor is potentially one of the ways that we can provide the greatest medium- to long-term carbon savings."