How many bodies does it take to build a transport system?

Stephen Revill, Consultant | April 2003

The government's new Land Transport Management Bill provides new options for policy and funding, but does little to sort out the tangle of public sector bodies trying to develop transport systems, says Bell Gully's Stephen Revill.

Last December, the government introduced the Land Transport Management Bill, heralded as the biggest change in land transport funding and management since the 1980s.

On some fronts that is true: the Bill widens funding options and introduces changes to transport policy.

However, the Bill does little to improve the tangle of public sector bodies that is expected to deliver integrated and responsive transport solutions.

For instance, while the Bill's policy sections propose integrated systems using all forms of transport, Transit's role continues to be tied to the operation of the state highway system (albeit in a way that contributes to the Bill's objectives).

Similarly, Transfund's national land transport account is only available to territorial authorities for local road projects, while regional council funding from national sources continues to focus on public transport.The Bill also does little to improve the fragmented system of agencies and authorities currently managing transport development.

For instance, in Auckland there are already about 17 agencies involved in managing and operating the region's transport network.

Indeed, we may be saddled with even more land transport agencies if the Minister decides to approve land transport funding for additional public organisations, a power granted under the Bill.

All of this seems to be strangely out of step with the Labour Party's policy to address whether some aggregation of current land transport providers might lead to better outcomes for land transport users and the community.

In pursuit of aggregation, the government has already undertaken some work to investigate the "clustering" concept.

This would include the creation of clustering agencies, involving various local authorities. These clusters would be jointly responsible for the management of a regional network of local roads and state highways, and it is believed to allow integrated solutions to particular land transport problems.

However, the clustering of road controlling authorities represents only part of the answer.

As the New Zealand Transport Strategy emphasises the funding of different types of transport to promote regional development, we will need to think beyond roading to meet the policy objectives of the new legislation.

The impetus for such reform could come from local government itself. Under the Local Government Act 2002, local authorities can engage in joint activities or joint undertakings - such as regional transport committees.

Local authorities can also establish council-controlled organisations to own, develop and manage all or part of a region's transport infrastructure.

An example of this, under earlier legislation, is the establishment of Auckland Regional Transport Network Limited, by five of the six territorial authorities in the region.

However, the council-controlled organisation model does not guarantee effective delivery of an integrated safe responsive and sustainable land transport system within a region.

The implementation of Auckland's rail transport project has been held up because of differences between the Auckland Regional Transport Network Limited and the Auckland Regional Council over the division of responsibilities for infrastructure and operation of services.

These problems may have arisen for largely historical reasons and progress has been made to resolve the differences.

However, it does highlight the need for effective governance processes if council-controlled organisations are to deliver land transport solutions effectively.

The Bill appears to prevent council-controlled organisations from participating directly in tolling schemes or public/private concession arrangements.

Under the Bill only Transit and territorial authorities can initiate the process for ministerial approval for these alternate sources of funding.

Council-controlled organisations will require ministerial approval to receive funding from the national transport account. Approval will be given only for specified land transport purposes and then subject to conditions.

The government may be more inclined to set up separate specialist land transport agencies to deliver regional solutions for land transport.

This solution has been mooted in a number of Ministry of Transport papers and is consistent with the more centralised approach to land transport planning introduced by the Bill.

However, local input into these agencies would need to be ensured, as would their accountability for funds received from the national land transport account and other road funding sources.

There is obviously more work to do in this area, and there is talk about a second land transport bill to address a number of outstanding land transport policy initiatives including collaboration between road controlling authorities.

It would be unfortunate, however, if reform of the transport management system were not completed during evaluation of the current Bill.

The land transport management systems proposed under the Bill do not look like being the best way to deliver integrated and responsive land transport systems for the nation during the next 10 years.

First published in the Dominion Post on 26 April 2003.