Independent study would be step forward on Auckland port row

Hundreds of protesters march against the Ports of Auckland wharf expansion. Photo / Dean Purcell

Opinion

My position is fairly straightforward. I'm pro business, want to see the port do well and believe that it's an important part of Auckland's infrastructure. However, I also think that Auckland's greatest long-term asset for our people and for tourism is our beautiful harbour, which has already been substantially narrowed by successive reclamations.

The proposed northern expansion would have reduced the harbour's width by over 10 per cent and materially diminished views from the city out to the gulf and islands. The predominant purpose of the proposed expansion is to store imported cars. While visually unattractive this also seems to be a very poor usage for some of the most valuable real estate in the country. It needs to be remembered that the port is a very long-term asset and any planning for it should not be done in a rush or behind closed doors.

I believe that the proposed independent study is a sensible step forward and will hopefully provide us all with facts so that we can have an informed debate about the questions that need to be answered, including:

• When taking a long-term view (50 years plus) is the port in the right place or are there any other viable options? No modern city would choose to have a port as its front doorstep, and many have moved them, but because of cost Auckland may have no choice.

• If the port remains where it is, it may have to accept that it will eventually become space- constrained and have to focus on higher value cargos and shed low value cargos to other ports. Is this feasible? Can other ports handle it?

• Does the port use its current area efficiently or can this be improved?

• The Port of Tauranga already operates a very successful inland port in Auckland which it services by rail. Can more goods be shipped this way and what is the additional cost?

• If the port is to be constrained this does not mean that it cannot grow profits. At the moment the port discounts many services to win business from other ports. As it gets closer to capacity, can it use price as a tool to shed low-value cargos and continue to grow profits?

• Does the port have the right governance structure which takes into account the needs of greater Auckland and not just a profit-maximising port company?

• Can the infrastructure connecting the port to Auckland be improved so that trucks can be removed from the already clogged roads and goods can be more easily railed offsite and stored elsewhere?

Material decisions relating to the development of our waterfront, the harbour and the port company should not be made behind closed doors by a single vested interest group acting with haste and in secrecy. That's poor governance by anyone's standard. We need an independent study done so that both sides of the debate have more information.

Paul Glass is executive chairman of Devon Funds Management.