Comments on: Worrying Rail Funding Cuts

By: admin

admin — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:58:37 +0000

I agree, and new electric trains should be far cheaper to operate than the ancient trains we run at the moment. Integrated ticketing shoulf also mean lower operating costs as fewer staff on the trains would be required.

By: Joshua

Joshua — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:54:17 +0000

Unfortunately rail prices should increase to match bus prices, for intergrated ticketing reasons, however welington is not a fair comparison due to the investment they have received, compare them once we finish electrification and the CBD tunnnel project.

By: George D

George D — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:27:21 +0000

Once again, the stupid people take over our transport policy.

By: Jeremy Harris

Jeremy Harris — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 08:52:15 +0000

Whoops, my first response makes no sense (wrong thread)…

It’s possible fares will be raised in Auckland to achieve parity with Wellington and then we get electric trains making us more efficient dollar for dollar…

By: admin

admin — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 07:53:51 +0000

A big difference is that Wellington has electric trains, which are far cheaper to run, while Auckland’s stuck with diesels. Of course, that’s being sorted out, although it seems like that fact is totally ignored by the boffins in Wellington.

By: Luke

Luke — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 07:39:33 +0000

The NZTA and the Treasury (where I think this is really coming from) have mentioned this Auckland/Wellington fare subsidy difference is several docs I have seen before.
They seem to completely ignore the fact that Wgtn and AK PT systems are at completely different stages of development, and the layout of the cities is very different. Wellington has had a reasonable PT system with good patronage for many years so it does not need to work to attract new users out of their cars. Wgtn also has a more condensed CBD, and only really two main corridors through the suburban areas which make provision of PT services much simpler.
On the other hand, Auckland needs to work hard to move people out of their cars, and the wider city is much more complicated which makes provision of services more difficult and thus more expensive.
I would also say that congestion is worse in Auckland so the benefits of moving people out their cars are higher.

By: Nick R

Nick R — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 07:32:49 +0000

Equalising fares is a good idea, especially as the first step toward integrated fares. A little unfortunate but realistically this involves putting train fares up to match buses.

By: admin

admin — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 07:18:56 +0000

I think small raises in the fares is probably OK, as it has been a while since the last increase. I also think it would be sensible to match up bus & train fares – considering that integrated ticketing is (supposedly) not too far away.

By: Steve

Steve — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 07:06:46 +0000

If the fare rise on rail is equalisation with the buses, then this is understandable IMO. Ideally they’d both move to $1.50 which is up for train and down slightly for bus, but in the current environment highly unlikely. Always thought it strange that for example Britomart – Kingsland by train is $1.40 but Vic St – Kingsland by bus is $1.60

By: Jeremy Harris

Jeremy Harris — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 07:00:29 +0000

It’s ridiculous to cut subsidies for one form of transport while not doing so for another… Don’t people get carbon pricing is coming and will be forever..?