There’s a fascinating article in the NZ Herald today about how trips on Auckland’s public transport system are getting longer and longer (distance wise, hopefully not time-wise!) These sections are particularly noteworthy:
Although a 7.7 per cent rise in public transport patronage in 2008-2009 was hailed as impressive when announced late last year, a table at the back of a report presented to the Auckland Regional Transport Committee yesterday disclosed a far higher proportional leap in kilometres travelled…
…The Auckland Regional Transport Authority reported 58.62 million subsidised passenger trips in 2008-09, covering 435.4 million km, at a cost to ratepayers and taxpayers through regional and Government subsidies of $143.5 million.
That was a 39.4 per cent leap from 312.4 million km in 2008, covered by $125.6 million of subsidies.
Although subsidies worked out at an average of $2.45c for each passenger, which was 5.9 per cent higher than in 2008, the cost for every km travelled by that passenger fell 17.6 per cent to 33c.
A 39% leap in kilometres travelled on public transport in just the one year is quite staggering. For a while now I have thought that simply counting the “number of trips” was a fairly crude method of measuring patronage – as a 50c bus trip up Queen Street doesn’t really feel as though it should count the same as a train trip from Pukekohe to the CBD, for example.
Considering that fuel prices throughout 2009 were significantly lower than in 2008 (generally), to have public transport’s “trip kilometres travelled” to leap by such a huge amount is excellent news.
Hopefully the Regional Council will put the report up in full on their website so we can have a good look at all the numbers.
Nice news … I’d venture that part of the change is because of more train services were provided (the Helensville connection and increased frequency in some lines) … “if you build it they will come”
However, I do have an issue with:
subsidised passenger trips
I’d agree with the term subsidised if other road users would also pay for their share of use of the traffic network but as free parking is provided in many areas of the city and there is no recognition of the fact that PT users are actively reducing the number of private vehicles on the roads, effectively reducing the travel time for some of those drivers, I say that I’m yet to be convinced of who’s subsidising who.
I honestly don’t understand why saving money on the 145 million in subsidies that is spent on PT in Auckland is an area where Joyce should waste his time. It’s a pathetically small amount of money and even saving 10% via this farebox policy would be pocket change. It actually shocks me to realise that the 100 million being spent on investigating the Puhoi to Wellsford motorway, money that just appeared out of thin air, is equal to 2/3rd of the entire PT budget for the year.
GOP, you’ve hit the nail on the head there. I spent most of last year yelling “hidden subsidies for road users!!!” I’m sure someone will figure it out eventually.
RTC, yes totally agree. It seems like Joyce’s dislike of public transport isn’t entirely rational at all.
Ummm, wouldn’t the jump in PT km travelled be the North Shore busway coming fully online? That seems to be the only change in PT that could explain such a frameshift. The busway is naturally skewed towards longer trips, as the shortest hop is from CBD to Takapuna, which is a couple of stages. That, and it is seriously faster for commuters from the top of the East Coast Bays going into town. So the busway trips should increase the average trip length, and it is so popular its numbers can drag up the whole region’s PT distance travelled.
Good news indeed
Any bets on increasing PT fares cutting that rising statistic? The stats in 2009 also reflect the Super Gold card travellers sitting on the train/ferry/bus all day (or at least after 9am).
Bob, yes I would say the Northern Busway has a pretty big role in that. However, the stats show a big jump in 2009 over 2008, while the busway opened in Feb 2008 I think. So it is more than just that I think.
I would say it is mostly to do with the significant growth in trips taken on the rapid transit network (i.e. the busway plus rail), as these tend to be quite long trips on account of the fact that they reach to the edges of the city and people prefer a a faster, higher quality mode when taking a long trip.