Genter Julie Anne: General Debate 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Genter Julie Anne: General Debate 
[Sitting date: 04 April 2012. Volume:679;Page:1656. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JULIE ANNE GENTER (Green) 
: 
 Tena koe tena koutou e te Whare. I am very pleased to take a call to discuss responsible financial management—responsible economic management and what that would mean for transport infrastructure. As my colleague the Hon John Banks just highlighted our economy is facing a serious risk. We are facing low growth and high oil prices and we are facing a zero Budget. So it is now more than ever that we need to be sure that our transport investments over the next decade are going to get the greatest value for money that we are investing in the best projects that will make it easier for people and freight to get around and that we respond to the changing needs of New Zealand.  
We have heard from the Government that the roads of national significance programme is about economic productivity. But we have seen no evidence that a few motorways which are incredibly expensive are the best use of the transport fund over the next decade. In fact we have evidence to the contrary. What is that evidence? It is a clear trend of stagnant traffic volumes since 2004. This is from the New Zealand Transport Agency’s own data published in February 2012 and it is clear. It is mirrored in other developed countries around the world.  
When oil prices went up in 2008 a number of things happened. First of all public transport cycling and walking all went through the roof. We have seen over 10 percent annual growth on the rail network in Auckland on the bus network and on the Northern Busway. We have seen massive increases in walking and cycling but many New Zealanders do not feel safe walking and cycling because we have not put enough money into that infrastructure. Many New Zealanders did not have reliable bus or train services to switch to and they had to spend more money getting around. This has flow-on consequences for our economy.  
We hear from the Government that the roads of national significance are not actually about reducing congestion and it is really great that it admits that. The roads of national significance are about freight which according to the Government is going to double some time in the next 10 or 20 years and as we have heard freight needs roads.  
But there are two problems with this argument. Firstly freight volumes have not increased over 2005 levels. We heard this at the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. The Ministry of Transport and the New Zealand Transport Agency both admitted that the National Freight Demands Study was wrong. Freight volumes have not increased in 5 years and therefore it is now extremely unlikely or actually impossible that they could double in the time that has been forecast by the Government.  
So these already shaky business cases for the roads of national significance have not been updated to reflect reality. I think that is because this would make it even more obvious that they are not the best projects for us to be investing in at this time. But even if freight movements were growing and freight definitely had to use roads—and most New Zealanders do have to drive—are the roads of national significance the best way to make sure that freight is moving efficiently? Is it the best way to ensure that road users can get where they need to go? The answer clearly would have to be no.  
Anyone who has looked at and drilled down into the business cases for these motorway projects would see that in the best-case scenario they are proposing to shave just a few minutes off journey times between cities and they would not do anything to help road users or freight move through crowded cities which is where the problems are.  
Freight is rarely more than 10 percent of traffic on these routes. It is only 1 percent of the traffic on the roads in Auckland at peak hour. So our poor freight operators through their road-user charges are going to be paying disproportionately for bad projects that are not going to help their businesses. In fact the freight operators will be made more vulnerable because as New Zealanders do not have alternatives—because the Government is not investing in public transport walking cycling and sustainable alternatives that enable them to avoid high oil prices—they have less money to spend and this results in less money to buy products that are moved around New Zealand by our freight operators.  
Indeed in 2009 we saw our freight operators lose massive amounts of their business because of the worsening economic conditions which are linked to oil prices. All the Green Party is asking for is a rational evidence-based approach to transport priorities and we look forward to working with the Government on delivering on this. Thank you.