My Auckland housing market story

The Auckland housing market appears to be bubbling along quite merrily at the moment. I did the numbers a few weeks ago and worked out we would be much better off paying gobs of money into a low-rate variable mortgage than we are renting. Obviously, time is the enemy as rates will surely head up, so all the better to get into a house as soon as possible and start piling on the cash and building the equity while money is relatively cheap. At the same time, the interest in our bank deposit had shrunk each month by more than half, amounting to a huge pay cut over the past year.

We want to pay a house off in less than a handful of years, so we opted to jump in at the lower mid-range on the North Shore. While $350K to $450K could get you 2 or even 3 homes outright in parts of south Auckland, on the North Shore you'll have to settle for just the one. In Auckland city proper you won't get much of a house at all for the same money. Maybe a passable 2 or maybe 3 bedroom flat...though the shoe boxes can be had fairly cheaply.

Last year, we could take weeks to not make up our minds. The houses weren't selling in any hurry. May / June '09 has been a very different story. We spent a couple of weeks chasing a handful of worthy houses only to find that things had accelerated considerably. The last two we were interested in - around $375 to $400K - went in barely a day.

Last week, we lifted our game, sharpened our focus and moved like lightning to make an offer on a lovely 5 bedroom home in Birkdale with a full size section. We got it for a lot less than the capital valuation. Half the borrowed sum is to be variable rate and will paid off in two years. The other half is fixed-rate at 6.09% for two years and we will roll that over into a variable mortgage, in whole of in part, when the time comes....and pay it off as fast as we can. Two more years or less.

These days, it makes a lot of sense to keep the debt as low as possible (if you must have any at all) and pay it off as fast as possible. At the same time, if inflation takes off, we have an asset that will appreciate. Having said that, the government's policies look set to keep downward pressure on house prices through rising unemployment and lower wages for those still in work.

Whatever. I'm feeling affirmed today as Bernard Hickey says now is the time to fix those mortgage rates.

Dunnit!

National. Melissa Lee. Ooops.

I'm often late to comment on these in-the-moment political stories. I do try to wait and see what happens and get a better feel for the big picture and not jump to conclusions. I don't always succeed, but I do try.

The Melissa Lee Singularity in Mt. Albert is such an event. She is obviously an intelligent woman and for the most part presents well. The video below (H/T The Standard and TV3) demonstrates this. But it also raises some questions about the judgement of the senior people in her party who put her forward.

In context, Melissa Lee's apparent brain fart at the 4:00 mark in the video below isn’t a big deal. People have that sort of thing happen all the time. I have done media interviews and I know it happens. Especially in a campaign situation where 8 hours sleep each night isn't a happening thing. One's head is often spinning with the events of the day and sleep doesn't come easy sometimes, even if you do get to bed at a reasonable hour.

What does matter is what is said in the more coherent moments. Most of what Melissa Lee says in this clip is fairly reasonable. Her language could be a little more sensitive. I’m not sure calling people “old ladies” is going to make them feel warm and happy. That’s the same sort of lack of finesse displayed in the south Auckland moment. Over time, that sort of error is usually fixable for a future campaign.

What is significant to me about Melissa Lee's record to date in her candidacy in the Mt Albert by-election is she was the choice of National Party HQ (overriding the local favourite) to front for the National Party in a high profile campaign, surrounded by some very difficult Auckland-specific - Mt Albert specific! - issues.

Ooops.

Rainy Easter Saturday

Learned a valuable lesson today. Do NOT go to Glenfield Mall on a showery Easter Saturday after 10am. The 900-odd car parks were all occupied and the drive ways through and among them were grid-locked.

We're all ready to not go next year...after 10am anyway.

I think the working day masks just how truly awful Auckland's traffic would be if most people (me included) didn't spend most of their day at work, off the road and away from the shops.

Proposed: An un-democratic, less accountable Auckland

I haven't had a chance to digest the whole recommendation by the Royal Commission with respect to Auckland's future organisation, but it is already obvious that the structures proposed will be a very long way from being genuinely representative and functionally democractic. As Idiot / Savant points out , the ten councillors elected at large will almost certainly be elected with a small proportion  of the total vote, thanks to First Past the Post. A unified group of 20% could see their entire slate of 10 elected from a field of 50 candidates and the other 80% of voters would get nothing.

I have said in posts months ago, if the new Auckland was not to have at least 35 councilors, elected from wards using a multi-member, preferential system STV, then I would have absolutely no interest whatever in such an amalgamation. It would amount to a take-over of Auckland by the people with money to mount campaigns.

The move to a 4 year term is also completely inappropriate for local government. Every aspect of this proposal reeks of moves to limit democracy and reduce accountability. 

Now I need to get my head around the detail. 

Auckland Lantern Festival '09

We went up to Albert Park Saturday evening to experience the annual lantern festival celebrating Chinese New Year. Had an awesome evening! If you missed it this year, make sure you plan to go next year!

Hope you enjoy this wee video of highlights of our evening.

Fragmented public transport fails again

Fullers - the company who operate the ferries around Auckland Harbour - have announced they will cut the ferry services to Half Moon Bay and Bayswater.

They threatened to do the same thing in 2005 and the Auckland Regional Transport Authority (ARTA) had to step in and provide an emergency subsidy to get them to carry on providing the services.

These ferries already cost $10 each way (at least, they do where I live) and I'm amazed anyone rides them.

Yet the logic of providing a ferry service as part of a wider regional transport network is powerful. Vancouver operate a ferry across their harbour and it is an excellent service. But none of it is private. It's all part of an integrated, publicly-owned transport network involving buses, rail, mono-rail and ferries.

Fullers no doubt are having trouble making the ferry business - all by itself - pay. They know they can't put the fares up any more. they are already more than high enough. So instead they must - effectively - hold all the ferry riders to ransom and twist the arm of the public funders to win a larger subisdy. The rising cost of fuel is probably part of this equation.

The whole problem could be avoided by having one publicly-owned transport organisation that operates on fares plus a subsidy and makes no profit. Where infrastructure is concerned, profit is an additional - and unecessary - cost.

We have already seen how inefficient a privately operated fragments of public transport are.

• Multiple ticketing systems.
• Poor coverage. Inability to invest in building usage on new routes or routes in new areas. 
• Relatively high fares by global standards.
• Long walks between services operated by different providers.
• Inconsistent services between providers. Some have new buses with air conditioning. Others have old creaky buses that act like sweat boxes on a hot day. 
• Few transport hubs to allow for the seamless movement between modes that are an essential part of any good service.  
• Buses competing with trains instead of buses feeding passengers to trains

...and ferries that cost a bomb to use.

Hopefully the new Act allowing ARTA to create and define public transport services will see the waste and inefficiency of the private sector addressed. To to be fair, this waste and inefficiency is the result of the "market forces" ideological nonsense that lead to the present situation.  Fragmented, incoherent services delivered by disparate and supposedly competing operators was never going to deliver an attractive, high quality, integrated public transport system. It hasn't anywhere else and it didn't here. 

Not that the ideologues would ever accept the evidence of failure. Like any religion they simply say "You're not doing it right."

Just like my kids do.....when they have no come back.

CBT Election forum on public transport

A day late, but better than never. The Campaign for Better Transport's forum on public transport was well attended with over 200 people turning up. The last dozen people had to stand when they arived.

Among the panelists were: Judith Tizard for Labour, Maurice Williamson for National, Keith Locke for the Greens, Rodney Hide for ACT, as well as Elliott Blade from RAM and Aaron Galey-Young from United Future. 

Christine Rose from the Auckland Regional Council was also on the panel. She kicked off the speeches, reciting a lot of very good things that have been happenig recently on the public transport front.

The good news was that every one of them agreed that public transport needed improvement. Almost all backed rail strongly, though National's Maurice Williamson preferred buses to trains for people moving. He argued they are cheaper and more flexible and he would be right about that up to a point. In my own experience, the big drawback wth buses is the need for a driver for each 50-70 people, whereas a train can move many hundreds of people with one driver and perhaps a guard to make sure no one gets stuck in a door. Trains are even more efficient when you stop collecting fares on board and take care of ticketing before people even get to the platform.

Williamson also argued trains were expensive to build and maintain and capital intensive and - again - he is correct up to a point......that point being when masses of buses simply can't scale to match demand. Buses also tend to share roads with other vehicles, further reducing their efficiency and reliability (for scheduling) overall.

The surprise of the evening for me was Rodney Hide's more or less bullish attitude toward public transport. It's not often the "Me first!" party supports the public good. There was one funny moment when the huge cross on the wall above the panel lit up while Hide was making a point. I'm sure he was mystified as to why people suddenly started laughing when he was making a serious (and worthwhile) point about integrated ticketing. Hide made it clear he isn't religious about any particular mode of transport and would be pragmatic in support of what was the best overall balance. But he did support more and better trains.

Judith Tizard put the public transport debate into context and gave a brief run-down on her 35 year history of involvement with the issue in Auckland. My memory may be faulty,  but it seemed to me she laid much of the blame for a generation of inaction on public transport at the feet of the National party's local  proxies, the Citizens and Ratepayers grouping.  She also made it clear that she wasn't a fan of privaisation of public transport by National, saying she thought the old Yellow Bus Company did a good job.

Keith Locke outlined the Greens' public transport policy and arguably received the largest round of applause during the evening. Williamson was hissed at most and loudest, by a few, though all speakers received significant applause, though more polite than enthusiastic for the speakers seen as being most car-friendly.

It was a great meeting, followed by a lively question and answer session with the usual mix of thoughtful questions and quesions that left you thinking "WTF!?" from one or two who clearly ned o hear the sound of their own voice.

I'm sure the CBT raised a few hundred dollars from the event and it won't go amiss in supporting future events and activities. 

Election '08: Public Transport Meeting

Tonight I'll be attending the Campaign for Better Tranport's "Election '08: Public Transport Meeting".

The details:

With Auckland's public transport straining to cope with patronage, come and find out what this year's general election candidates have to say.

Speakers include:

• Judith Tizard - Labour
• Maurice Williamson - National
• Keith Locke - Green Party
• Rodney Hide - ACT
• Aaron Galey-Young - United Future

Auckland Regional Councillor Christine Rose will also highlight the challenges facing the Auckland public transport network.

Candidates will be allocated speaking slots of eight minutes each, to allow time for questions and answers from the floor.

• When: Wednesday 24th September, 7:30pm start
• Where: Methodist Church, 360 Queen Street, opp. Auckland Town Hall
  

Buses: NZ Herald falls off right end of the Earth

Whoever wrote the editorial ("Back off on the buses") in Monday's Herald is almost certainly not a user of Auckland region public transport. If they do use it, they must be among the lucky few who enjoy the door-to-door services randomly possible from any single provider, but most definitely not two.

The long walks - in any weather - from your starting point to the bus stop, then between carriers, and then again to your final destination can easily amount to 2 kms all up and that's only ONE way. The lack of integrated ticketing. The lack of integration between trains and buses because the latter see themselves as competing with rail. The lack of any weekend services or off-peak services across huge parts of the city, make it even worse.

This is not what any sane person describes as a good service. It isn't even an adequate service for huge parts of the Auckland region. Cities like Toronto and Vancouver (Van is comparable to Auckland in size) have excellent public transport and they do not operate a disparate set of fragmented, privately-owned systems.

Can anyone provide me with an example of a region-wide, integrated publc transport system in a large city that can be described as excellent? To be fair, it must also lack any real central authority or effective oversight. The only excellent systems I have ever used have ALL been operated by a single public provider. I've used public transport in a lot of cities and Auckland has a long way to go before it can be described as excellent. 

It seems the the Herald obtusely clings to market theory now LONG proven to be nonsense in public transport reality. Markets definitely work well for some things, but it is increasingly obvious that infrastructure of almost any sort isn't one of them.

ARTA (Auckland Regional Transport Authority) was set up by the "Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Act 2004". It's about to be given the powers an equivalent organisation SHOULD have had right from when the public transport system was privatised (which shouldn't have happened anyway) by the National Party and it's local proxies.

Public transport is like the circulatory system in a human body. You need a heart to drive the "blood" around and an integrated set of paths to and from, servicing all areas. You can't leave every organ to fend for itself and the blood to decide which organ it will use.....if there happens to be one nearby. It's absolute raving nonsense to think it would work well and it hasn't.

That the Herald STILL can't see how poor and dysfunctional this system is says a a great deal about their (in)ability to perceive things as they are. Bearing that perceptual impairment in mind, the Herald's views on a whole range of topcs cannot be credible where the market theory they hold to conflicts with the reality of dismal failure in actual practice.

Its looks like if there is a big advertiser with a vested interest to defend, the Herald will defend it.

Not clever in the long run. Especially for a monopoly. Distrust will one day see them lose that monopoly.

Pondering a new Auckland

In the Herald, Bernard Orsman reports on the progress of the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance. As one might expect, the various communities of interest advance their own interests. After North Shore City and Manukau had made their presentations, Justice Salmon commented:

"I would like to see the big councils expressing a view that put Auckland first. What we get from each of them is expressing a view putting their own territories first."

In my view, this strikes to the very heart of the issue for Auckland and one could extend it to the whole of the country without too much effort.

In my own submission, I argued for a single Council for the whole Auckland region provided the Council was elected by a ward-based STV voting system. If it were to be elected by First Past the Post (FPP), I would oppose amalgamation altogether in favour of retaining the existing fragmented structure. Any new Auckland must be robustly democratic and strongly representative. STV, properly configured, allows all significant minorities to win representation. First Past the Post gives representation to the one or two largest minorities only, and excludes all others. FPP is poor democracy and would ultimately undermine the legitimacy of the new Auckland Council as most voters would not have voted for the people who claimed to represent them.

The new unified Council would need to have at least 35 Councilors. Preferably 50. It the number was too small, then Councilors would be inaccessible to most people. The more Councilors you have, the fewer Community Boards would be required. Run that equation in both directions.

There would be no need for a regional body as the unified Council would serve both roles with Community Boards being advocates for various communities.

I can see a role for specific Maori representation, perhaps in a parallel set of region-wide "Maori wards" or maybe by guaranteeing several seats to the highest polling Maori candidates on the common roll. It depends on whether you want just Maori to choose these Councilors or all voters to haver a say. Arguments will run in both directions.

I'm vague / flexible on the details because my primary interest is in a single Council that has the power and reach to do what needs to be done with the infrastructure for the entire region without wasting years - even decades - tangled in parochial interests.

For example, the Auckland Regional Transport Authority (ARTA) is knobbled in almost every direction. They carry the responsibility for public transport but appear to lack most of the authority that would allow them to actually do it properly.

Not least among the constraints is the dreadfully wasteful "funder / provider" split between ARTA and a dozen or more private operators. Ticketing is a mess and taking years to sort out. Pricing is too high. Bus routes often don't integrate with train timetables. In many cases, they don't even go to the stations. Some idiot built Britomart with only one rail line in or out and no bus hub. You have to leave Britomart and wander around the CBD looking for your bus and - separately - the vendor who sells concession tickets for that particular operator. Britomart doesn't.
Transfers are poorly integrated, often requiring people, assuming they are able enough, to make long walks between carriers, up hill or down, rain or shine.

It won't get any better until the political environment changes and that won't happen until a new, empowered Council can build transit hubs, re-align roads and MAKE it happen.

Public Transit on the North Shore

I wanted to use public transit to go to work from my home in Beach Haven to my new job in Albany.

Depending on how I strike the traffic lights at intersections, it takes roughly 14 minutes to make the trip in the morning in my 1.3L car. In the evening, the long queue to turn right (southbound on Glenfield) at the lights where Wairau Rd touches Glenfield Rd, adds about 5 minutes to the return trip.

Taking the bus would involve two buses, $5.90 each way, 1.6km of walking and 1 hour and 11 minutes - each way. Included is a tiki tour around the highlights of the North Shore: Birkenhead, Northcote Centre, AUT in Takapuna, the hospital, Smales farm, Akoranga.....and so on. Buying a Northern 7 day Pass would be $38.50 each week. My car is currently lasting 2 weeks on a $65 tank of petrol, including all trips, not just those to work.

I just don't have the time to take the bus. That extra 2 hours each day is my time.

Stupid people

I'm adding a new label to my blog: "Stupid people". I'm going to attach it to posts about people who are......stupid.

Today, evidence of under-thought by some is noted in an NZ Herald story about Aucklanders who drive in the bus-only transit lanes. The fines are $150 per infraction. Some months fines total $80,000.

I suspect it isn't only bus transit lanes that see them exhibit an exaggerated sense of entitlement with respect to the rest of us. I'm sure we'll see some of them pushing in at the supermarket and in pubs and down at the video store. I think the names and photos of these queue-jumpers should be published. Both face and back photos...as you're most likley to see the rear view as they push in front of you.

It would be nice to know who they are, these people who think they are more important than the rest of us.

Live webcam: Awesome view of Auckland

UPDATE: The webcam was TVNZ's and they took it off the Internet in late 2008, I think, and now they only use it on their news programs and with their weather bulletins. Thanks TVNZ! Phhft.

The Metservice web site has had a link to a live webcam at Devonport for a while now. Over the weekend, it went "off"....which was disappointing.

However! It has come back better than ever (my opinion, of course). The new link appears to be a east-north-easterly pan over the CBD, Waitemata Harbour, North Shore and Rangitoto. With the Sun low in the morning sky right now, the visual effect is impressive. I'm sure there will be many moods displayed through the day. If you have any friends or homesick Kiwis overseas, you may want to send them this one. It's a genuine live feed. I could make out a boat making steady progress toward the harbour entrance and the shadows of the clouds speeding Eastward.

Fullscreen mode is impressive. The page says that full screen only work with MS I, but I've found it also works with Apple's Safari browser on Windows Vista. Safari must be a front-end for the IE engine...

Check it out!

Auckland, NZ Dollar, ARTA, End-time silliness

Several things happened (or failed to happen) today that are noteworthy from my point of view.

Last day: Royal Commission on Auckland Governance

Today was the last day for submissions to the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance. I got mine in on time. Did you?

In order to bring some measure of coherence to the Auckland urban area and put us all on the same page, I recommended a single city with Councilors elected from up to 7 wards. There would be between 5 and 9 councilors elected from each ward, depending on the population. These Councilors would be elected by Single Transferable Vote (STV) rather than the current first past the post voting system. STV would allow for robustly democratic and diverse outcomes with more equitable representation among the communities that compose Auckland. The Council should be 35 to 50 (or maybe more) in number. There would need to be enough Councilors to sit on the relevant committees that would capture input and feedback from people and groups in the Auckland region.

I submitted that the Mayor of Auckland should have little, if any executive power and act instead as the Chair of the Council. The Mayor's job would be to find common ground and build consensus and cast the deciding vote, but only if necessary. There should be no "Presidential mayor" that would polarise rather than bring together. The Mayor could be elected from across the city or elected by the Council from among their number. This is provided the Council is elected by STV.

In response to the local governance issue, I said I saw no reason why any part of Auckland would need special laws that could not be passed by one council. There may be special circumstances in some places, but they should be recognised within the regional framework and addressed in that context.

There was more, but that is the guts of it.

NZ Dollar

I've heard some business people complaining that the NZ dollar is "too high" (against the US dollar) and lamenting the policies of the government that made it so.

But let's look at what's really going on.

The NZ dollar has fallen against the Euro from €0.54 two months ago to €0.49 today. It's fallen against the Aussie dollar from AU$0.88 two months ago to AU$0.84 today. The NZ dollar has fallen against the Yen from Y87.5 two months ago to Y81.5 today.

The Kiwi has been declining or stable with respect to the currencies of many countries we trade with other than the US. One of the reasons our currency is desirable is the good performance of our economy against global trends.

It's the US dollar that is going down against everyone - even the Chinese, who have their yuan set to "sticky" mode in relation to the US dollar. In fact, the US greenback has been in serious trouble ever since George W Bush decided to cut taxes while simultaneously exploding a fiscal debt bomb when he invaded Iraq and decided to stay. After the invasion, the US Fed increased interest rates for 11 straight quarters, and central banks all over the world followed suit in order to compete for capital against the black hole of US debt: public and private.

Those higher interest rates in the US, driven by the US Federal reserve rate rises, arguably lead to the sub-prime credit crunch by taking interest rates well outside previously expected bounds.

None of this was in any way controllable from New Zealand or any other country.

I'd like to know why our exporters and the people they trade with still price their products in US dollars.

The Euro would be a much better option. We've been relatively stable against the Euro.

Why do people seem to expect theNZ government to indemnify them against the instability of the US dollar with policies that would keep our dollar going down even faster than the plummeting greenback?

That makes no sense to me. Why would we want to have an economy in even more trouble than the US economy in order to see our currency plummet even faster than theirs? If anyone thinks they have a good answer to that one, I'd love to hear it.

If we had a "40 cent" Kiwi dollar, we could be paying close to NZ$4 for a litre of petrol. A 1kg block of cheese at $13 today would be more like $26. Would your wages track that? I'm thinking not. Hands up everyone who thinks that makes any sense?

ARTA and Children

I finally got a response from ARTA (Auckland Regional Transport Authority) today about Birkenhead Transport not allowing school children on peak-hour buses.
Here is the (anonymised) letter:

Thank you for bringing to our attention the matter of the school buses
operating in the Birkenhead area.

Following direct communications with Birkenhead Transport, operator for both the regular bus services and the school buses, it has been confirmed that the regular services are available for any fare paying passenger, including school children. Therefore, the service is provided in accordance to existing public transport policies. If any incidence of this policy not being followed does arise, please let us know and it will be treated on an individual basis.

It is important to note, however, that we strongly recommend that school children make use of the school buses available. This responds to operational considerations related to the needs of commuters to the city as well as to the numbers of school children required to justify the existence of a school bus service. It is ARTA's responsibility to monitor that the school bus services are well patronised and therefore guarantee that its provision is an appropriate use of resources.

Lastly, I would like to take this opportunity to inform you will be hearing from us shortly regarding other concerns you have raised.

Best regards

On behalf of ARTA

Great to hear that children in Birkenhead Transport's area of operation should now be able to board any bus. Thank you, ARTA.

I note the comments regarding operational considerations and the need to support the school buses. While perfectly reasonable on one level, ARTA hasn't dealt with the reality that the school bus they urge us to use leaves at 07:43am and arrives at the school at 07:56am. That's 50 minutes prior to classes commencing. Other options offered on the Journey Planner were to walk the whole way any time you like or take a 7-hour two-step via the morning school bus to Northcote and then take the afternoon (after school) school bus from Onewa Rd to St. Mary's Convent School....then walk 500 metres to Birkenhead College to arrive after classes have ended for the day. That one was just silly.

I responded and asked politely if the person writing to me had checked the timing of the school buses. It isn't much use offering a school bus at a time so early it has little practical value. Or one that takes all day and arrives after classes end. I included the relevant options (as above).

I'm waiting to hear back.

End of the World

Pastor Ronald Weinland, "end-time witness" and head of the Ronald and Laura 'god-family', hasn't posted anything more on the First Trumpet sounded at the opening of the Seventh Seal since the 18th, so I'm assuming the world is OK for now. Fingers crossed. He was in Palestine for the big (non) event. He should be back in the US by now and may be laying low given nothing whatever happened. The only part of his prophecy that came true was that the few people who were aware of his claims did make fun of him and there was some mocking. Perfectly reasonable under the circumstances, but probably only feeding Pastor Weinland's sense of righteousness. So no more mocking. After that last bit of mocking. No, really.....No more.

Auckland Governance

The Auckland City proposal for the super council is, in my view, broadly the right way to go. Auckland's fragmentation has seen opportunity squandered again and again by visionless parochialism and turf-protecting of many local councils in the region. In this respect Auckland is no different to any other major urban area that grew from a collection of previously different municipalities.

Where I think it misses the mark is the actual democratic representation will be limited to 21 councilors. That's for over a million people. That's terrible. Given the new Council's penchant for closed meetings, I would not be optimistic that the politburo being proposed by Auckland would be anything like "open and transparent" in operation. Any one "neighbourhood" will be required to put all of their representational eggs in one basket - a single person. This conjures up all the problems that used to bedevil representation in Wellington under First Past the Post. In every neighbourhood in Auckland there will be thousands of people who end up with a representative who doesn't actually reflect their community values or how they see the world.

I'd like to see a single council, but divided into wards / regions of geographic common interest. Each of those wards would see at least 5 representatives elected usng STV (single transferable vote). We could have as few as 5 or 6 wards, for a total of 25 or 30 councilors. Not much larger than the Auckland proposal, but vastly more representative of the 'whole' of each of the communities they come from. I'd prefer to see anywhere up to 10 wards, for a total of 50 Councilors. Auckland is a big place and the Council needs to have enough talent / horsepower to come to grips with the detail of running the place so that they can have a decent chance of doing a good job of it. These people will be busy people. Cost? How many millions have been wasted on BAD decsions in recent years? A lot more money than an adequate Council would cost.

"Lord Mayor"? That's got to be a Banks-ian brain fart. Or maybe it's an obvious target to be shot down as a "concession" while the main agenda proceeds. Whatever. "Mayor" will do. Make the other 4 mayors "Deputy Mayor". Or whatever. John Banks doesn't need to be any more grand than he already thinks he is.

The North Shore City Council appears to share many of my concerns about representation and transparency and community. Where I differ with the NSCC is that I do think amalgamation is necessary. Otherwise, the differing flags of each "city" will remain rallying points for parochial interests and there will be no requirement or incentive for participants in Auckland government to see the big picture.

In Toronto, Canada, many of the same problems went on for ages until 10 years ago when the Ontario provincial government banged all the disparate, historically mandated local councils together into one Toronto City Council. The result - after all the bitching and moaning subsided - was a city that sees itself as it is: one big community. Having spent 6 months there last year, it was interesting to note the LACK of time being wasted by the inter-council bitch-slapping that used to go on.

Unfortunately for Toronto, the provincial government was a fairly extreme, by Ontario standards, Conservative government. They used the amalgamation as an excuse to strip the new city of hundreds of millions of dollars of provincial funding. That resulted in the new city NOT being able to do things the 6 old councils used to be able to do....leading to much hatred of amalgamation and of the provincial government. Parochial attitudes die hard. The Conservatives were kicked out at the next election and they don't hold a single Toronto seat in the provincial legislature. The rest of Ontario sees Toronto in much the same way as the rest of New Zealand sees Auckland. There were votes to be won by kicking the Big City. But there were votes lost, too. There is a warning there for any government in Wellington that was silly enough to try to do the same to a new, mega-Auckland.

Weekend Grab Bag: MAXX, Zimbabwe, Women and Babies

Lots of things to think about today.

Zimbabwe

What about Zimbabwe? In a few hours we'll know whether or not Mugabe cheated. Part of me thinks he has. Part of me thinks maybe this election is a face-saving exit strategy for him and a chance to demonstrate Zimbabwe is a real democracy and always was.....ahem. We'll find out soon enough. I'm hopeful but not optimistic.

Population

Kiwi women not having babies? Interesting that the first comment after that is from the usual demographers who appear to argue in favour of the pyramid scheme that sees population never able to shrink because we might have too look after each other until the eldest generation passes....and then those who come after enjoy the benefits of a smaller population and more resources to go around. They don't talk about that. In my view, the world actually needs to produce fewer people and we do have to wear the temporary inconvenience of looking after the elderly in each generation for the relatively brief time (for the the vast majority of them) they would need looking after....if at all.

The alternative is an ever-growing population and that isn't sustainable. Why go the way of the UK and make NZ into a South Pacific ant hill where the quality of life is considerably degraded as compared to the present? I don't want to and few Kiwis will disagree with that, I suspect. Interested in your thoughts.

MAXX Redux

After noting on Thursday the sudden disappearance of the public forums on the revamped website, Friday saw the MAXX issue come up again.

Let's start at the beginning. I support public transport. It makes sense. I've used public transit only (no car) in getting around cities like Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, London, Hong Kong, San Fransisco and Singapore. As far as I know, all those cities have a single, operator providing services and the services, while not always perfect, are generally very good.

Auckland: I like MAXX. It's a worthy attempt to overcome the serious obstacles created by having regional transport services operated by a diverse set of competing private operators. MAXX is an attempt to herd cats and as such will only ever meet with limited success. I've been measuring that success from my own point of view since arriving in Auckland in early December. While there some good bits in places, I find MAXX's overall services expensive, slow and poorly integrated. One is frequently required to walk half a km or more to move between services offered by different providers. Each way. Plus a walk at either end that may be a few hundred metres or a lot more than a few hundred metres. The suitability of MAXX services for a family of four to go anywhere is more the exception than the rule. The family car is almost always BOTH cheaper and faster. That is not how it should be. It could be a lot better.

I've had a few problems with services where I live (north shore) and I've been trying to deal with them in a positive and constructive way: Call MAXX. Report problem. Await feedback and result. This can work and work very well. Several situations have been effectively resolved this way. The bus driver who refused to drive down our street, forcing my wife to walk 1/2km home, has been told he must drive down our street as it is part of his route.

But MAXX has some serious issues where children are concerned. You'd think they would get this right, given they are the future of public transport and they are among our most vulnerable citizens. Unfortunately, at least for Birkenhead Transport, they have not got it right.

I've had a query about MAXX's policy regarding child fares recorded with MAXX since late January. The first query was on January 30th. They said they would come back to me in 7 working days. At most. When I called back a month later, on March 4th, that query had mysteriously disappeared. I opened another. Well over 7 working days went by and no word, so I called again on the Wednesday prior to Easter. The matter had not been touched. After speaking with the supervisor, the person I was speaking to said I would be called back within 24 hours.

I waited a week and heard nothing. So I called back on Thursday this past week, got another 24 hour commitment...and by 5pm Friday had not been called back. That is four (4) failures in a row to abide by the service expectation they had given me with respect to my query. Not good. Total system failure.

What's my query? Very simple. MAXX's policy on child fares is that children aged 5 to 15 ride for a concession rate. That's it. Policy complete. Any child on earth who finds themselves in Auckland can ride on MAXX services for a concession fare.

Except that isn't how it REALLY works if (at least) Birkenhead Transport is your local bus company. They require kids to be in school uniforms or have student ID to pay the concession fare. So the first time my 14yo daughter got on a bus, having never attended an Auckland school, she found herself in an argument with the bus driver over her fare. Welcome to Auckland public transport, young lady. What was happening was not consistent with MAXX's stated policy.

Given MAXX's stated policy on child fares, what ID is required to ensure a child can ride for the correct fare? Remember the child concerned could be from anywhere in New Zealand or around the world. The question appears to defy any attempt to get an answer.

Then, on Friday a new wrinkle appeared. My daughter has been coming home from school telling me that bus drivers on Birkenhead Transport are not allowing school kids on "adult" buses in the morning. A child standing at a bus stop at 08:20am is refused entry to the bus AT ANY PRICE and instructed to get the school bus...which left at 07:41AM (40 minutes prior). They then have to walk. This is clearly contrary to MAXX's policy on children riding buses. It leaves school kids walking 40 minutes plus to school while their parents may have reasonably expected them to be quickly - and safely - conveyed to school on the bus, having paid the required dollar.

What will happen if a 14yo girl who was forced to walk to school, by a bus driver / company ignoring MAXX policy, is later run over, raped or worse? I can just imagine the anger and anguish that would produce. Why go there?

Just to confuse things, my daughter has had no problems because she uses a 10-trip rather than buying a single ticket. I can only assume this is some confusion with the tertiary student policy. Or maybe some bus drivers favour girls and refuse rides to boys. Who knows? As it is, bus drivers are reportedly sailing past stops with school kids waiting on the basis they should get the school bus.....tomorrow as today's left 40 minutes ago.

I then called Birkenhead Transport and asked what was going on. They tacitly admitted the policy was a company policy, not just bus drivers behaving badly. The (unnamed) person I spoke to said that children were filling the adult buses at peak times while the school buses were empty. So they are, as a matter of policy, refusing to carry children on normal buses. Clearly a violation of MAXX policy.

I logged another query with MAXX over it and I think this one will see a quick response. But we'll see. As it stands, the people who are the future of public transport, and arguably among the more vulnerable bus patrons, are being taught that arbitrary refusal of service is their lot. Capricious authority strikes again. Death to petty bureaucrats....etc..etc. Not good for them....or public transport in Auckland.

Auckland: Governance and Transport

Royal Commission on Auckland Governance

Here is some good news! There is a Royal Commission on Auckland Governance currently underway to "...investigate, and make recommendations on, local and regional government arrangements for the Auckland region in the future."

Anyone who thinks they have a view on this owes it to themselves to make a submission. I'll certainly be making one.

Auckland Public Transport

Since shifting to Auckland recently, I've been soaking up anything and everything about MAXX and the operators who provide the service. I am particularly curious as I spent most of 6 months last year car-less and using the services of the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC). The TTC sets a very high standard for MAXX to meet, I have to say.

It is clear that there has been a huge amount of progress on the public transport front in Auckland in recent years. It is also clear (to me) that the multiple private contractors providing service across the city result in poorly integrated infrastructure, services and ticketing. It costs a relative bomb to get from the North Shore to Sylvia Park and back (for example). For a family of four, MAXX would cost more than double and take more than twice as long as the same trip in the family car.

It's seems obvious to me that a single regional transport authority that actually owns the services and everything related to them would be a much more efficient way to go. It would be able to react to meet customer demand, invest in creating demand in new areas and rapidly allocate resources where they were needed.....whether or not they were at that point in time profitable. One flat fare could be charged for the whole city - to go anywhere. Where this is done, usage of public transport is far higher than Auckland.

MAXX Niggle

I note that MAXX's new web site no longer includes the discussion forums that had previously been a popular way for people interested in MAXX services to swap stories about the service. The forums were removed without any consultation and notice they were disappearing amounted to a single day: "....from tomorrow....". (In case it is removed, it said: "Also please note that from tomorrow the MAXX website public forum will be closed. The reason for this is that in the redesign of the homepage of the MAXX website the focus is on providing you with "how to use public transport" information. All other items have also been removed from the MAXX homepage.")

As one who used those forums to gauge sentiment among users of the MAXX services, I'm very sorry to see them go. I have a server here at home and I'm looking at setting up public transit forums on it so people who want to can maintain the discussion.

The MAXX move at the very least indicates MAXX saw no value in the forums and the customer discussions that took place there. At worst, it could be seen as an example of a petulant bureaucracy reacting to public criticism by cutting it off rather than listening and - even better - addressing it.