State Highway 25A, Kopu to Hikuai Rd on the Coromandel Peninsula. Photo / Waka Kotahi
This op-ed appeared in the NZ Herald’s Infrastructure Report. Read more views here.
OPINION:
The recent devastating weather events have highlighted two key things about our infrastructure in New Zealand.
We’ve known about the first for a long time and that is the 30 to 40 years of under-investment that has led to an infrastructure deficit — highlighted, in stark relief, by the state of various networks post the Anniversary Weekend floods and Cyclone Gabrielle.
While critical electricity and communications networks were restored relatively quickly, our road and rail networks have yet to recover. Almost four months on, many of those affected communities are only just being linked back into their usual networks, or still remain isolated at the end of long and slow detours.
Is it acceptable, when the weather experts tell us we’re going to have more of these highly disruptive bursts of extreme weather, that communities in many less populated parts of the country, or even in difficult access areas close to our major cities, will be socially and economically cut off on a more frequent basis for weeks or months at a time?
The second part of the equation is: How do we build better resilience into networks; are we set up to do that quickly; and do we need to rethink where and how we replace that infrastructure?
Then, of course, we still have to fund the new and replacement networks required.
The current headlong rush to replace the Resource Management Act before the election also comes into question. Will the three new Acts — one of which we have yet to even see — allow us to respond in a timely manner to rebuild and replace in the aftermath of these events?
When environmental heavyweights such as Eugenie Sage, chair of Parliament’s Environment Select Committee, and Commissioner for the Environment Simon Upton say “slow down”, you’d think the Government and the Minister might listen and take the time to get this critical nation-building legislation right.
By all accounts, there will be many changes after the select Committee to the Spatial Planning and Natural and Built Environment Acts but very little time to consider the implications of those changes following the report back from the Select Committee on June 27.
The current timetable has the second and third readings in quick succession with legislation to be passed prior to the House rising for the final time in early September.
The EMA’s members are drawn largely from the area north of Taupō to the Far North with roughly two-thirds of New Zealand’s economy based in that region.
As with communities in Napier and Gisborne and others around the country, the effects of the floods and the cyclone were devastating for our communities and businesses alike and are still being felt.
The nervousness and concern is palpable every time there is a poor weather forecast and we routinely see the preventative deployment of sandbags, boarding up of premises and the ongoing, highly disruptive closures of key transport links, especially the Auckland Harbour Bridge.
During the combined impacts of the floods and cyclone, the country was just one transport link away from being isolated from our major export port at Tauranga.
Just one road remained open.
The entire Northland region, one of the fastest-growing economies consistently over the past few years, was cut off for weeks just North of Auckland and the rail link remains closed. Access between Whangārei and Auckland remains difficult and time-consuming for residents, workers and critical freight. Access further north of Whangārei also remains problematic with closures of the Mangamuka Gorge link to Kaitaia and the far north stretching out for years.
The communities and economies of the Coromandel Peninsula have also been battered, with residents on the east coast of the peninsula facing five-hour, one-way trips for medical treatments and other routine daily travels. Trade on two of the biggest holiday weekends of the year was lost to the weather, following two years of Covid and awful summer school holiday weather.
It is unfathomable that State Highway 25A seems likely to be closed for at least a year.
And in Auckland, many residents are only just having access to their communities reopened. They still face doubts about their red or yellow-stickered homes, and businesses are still trying to rebuild and recover. The time taken to process insurance claims and consents, the shortage of construction workers, and the time it takes governments — local and central — to formulate their responses add to people’s stress and the delays in replacing infrastructure. So, what are the answers for infrastructure?
First, we need to consider where we rebuild and our priorities around reconnecting communities socially and economically.
Putting the needs of those communities ahead of but not ignoring environmental considerations may come at what some would perceive as some cost to the environment. What are our priorities?
Does rebuilding the same road up the Coromandel Coast from the Thames to Coromandel and beyond make sense when the Coromandel Ranges are going to keep falling on that road? Can we create a coastal highway with pillars in the seabed and move away from those hills or an alternative route inland and could they be consented, and built at what cost? We’ve done that before with Haast and Arthur’s Pass and the new Manawatu Gorge Rd.
Are we putting in place a fit-for-purpose alternate route north from Tauranga via SH2 and Katikati to Auckland and what is the long-term future for the current Karangahake Gorge road on that route? What about significant upgrades to SH29 east of Tauranga to Hamilton, unlocking Tauranga’s Tauriko suburban and business development plans but also adding resilience to the freight networks. Do we need to rebore the Kaimai rail tunnels and upgrade that link to enable more freight movements by rail?
The growth of the economies in Whangārei and further north demands much greater connectivity to Auckland and also Tauranga. Should we be going around or through the Brynderwyn Hills as a priority corridor for road, rail or both? Unlocking that corridor also increases the demand for better access further north of Whangārei. It also means the current safety upgrade for the problematic Dome Valley, north of Auckland, hardly looks fit for purpose.
And, how do we fund all that?
New Zealand simply can’t fund all of this. So, we have to be pragmatic and realistic and open our doors to overseas funding and the provision of revenue streams to pay for that funding. The most visible of those tools is tolling.
We already do that on selected parts of our highway network, and we should simply expand that to major new projects while also introducing congestion charging, at the very least in Auckland. We need not be shy about using that money to also finance new and much-needed public transport.
City deals, GST sharing, infrastructure bonds, targeted rates and special purpose vehicles (SPVs) are all available tools and we are starting to use some of those. Major local funds such as iwi, ACC and the Super Fund want to invest and large-scale multi-nationals are looking around the world for opportunities to invest in infrastructure. The EMA is aware of one local fund that would even like to co-invest in rail opportunities.
Recent weather events have shown us that resilience and adaptability are what we need in our infrastructure. But the most pressing need is simply to get on with it.
· Brett O’Riley is CEO of the EMA. The EMA is a founding member of InfrastructureNZ, the Western Bay of Plenty Infrastructure Group and the Auckland Business Forum (now expanded to become the Northern Infrastructure Forum). It is also currently working with Whangārei and Northland business and community leaders on infrastructure priorities for the region.
· The EMA is an advertising sponsor of the Herald’s Infrastructure report.
A potential low-system is set to form on the northeast coast of New Zealand.