- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Saturday, February 19, 2011

Bullshit reason for train fare increase



Increased services will push up Auckland train fares again
Auckland rail fares are rising for the second time in under six months, by an average of about 6.5 per cent.

Although subsidised bus and ferry fares will remain unchanged for the next year, Auckland Transport announced last night that the price of train travel will rise on March 13.

That follows an annual review of all public transport fares, which the council-controlled organisation was keen to point out was separate from increases of 2 to 3 per cent in October reflecting the Government-imposed increase in GST to 15 per cent.


Cattle trucks are more comfortable than trains in Auckland but one of its few virtues is that it is cheap, look at the bullshit excuse being used this time to increase fares, is it for 'infrastructure'? No. Is it for increased fuel costs? No. Is it because Len Brown catches the train as occasionally as the Link Bus service comes on time? No.

The reason the train fares are going up is...

Chief executive David Warburton said the latest increases - ranging from 10c on a one-stage fare of $1.60 to 60c on the $8.30 for an eight-stage trip - were aimed at bringing them closer to bus tariffs.


...I'm sorry WHAT? The train fare is going up to match the already high bus fare? Do these guys just have a laugh and pull out a bullshit reason from their bullshit excuses hat when justifying their constant fare increases?

How do we get more Aucklanders onto public transport when we keep pushing the fares up based on bullshit reasons like 'we have to catch up with the bus fares'.

Len while you are symbolically catching the train, can you give them a kicking over raising the fares based on nonsense?

4 Comments:

At 19/2/11 9:08 am, Blogger libertyscott said...

Trains are more comfortable than buses and cost more to run, that's a better reason and the real one. The NZTA consultation document on fares and cost recovery shows the difference to be significant.

Bus fares tend to recover about half the cost of the service as do rail fares in Wellington, rail fares in Auckland recover more like a third of the operating costs. The alternative is to put up rates.

 
At 19/2/11 10:11 am, Blogger Bomber said...

pffft - You've never caught a train in Auckland then have you? As for the percentage of fares covered in Wellington and Auckland, Wellington has sucked down enough of Aucklands taxes into their infrastructure at great cost to Aucklands infrastructure ever since Wellington became the capital, Aucklanders should have their fares subsidized higher and for longer.

I'm surprised you commented liberty? Your baseless bullshit column on your blog about the left justifying Islamic terrorism was the most bullshit thing I've ever had the unfortunate experience of reading, I had no idea your warped version of liberty expanded to public transport.

BTW - it's just a technical thing, but as a blogger you should know how to link properly, you didn't link to the article on Tumeke, just a link to the site.

 
At 20/2/11 8:33 am, Blogger Carol said...

But in the Stuff article:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/4679621/Auckland-commuters-to-pay-more

Auckland Transport’s Chief Executive David Warburton says putting more train services on the tracks has forced rail ticket prices up.

But he also says:

“More public transport users mean less congestion and faster travel times on the roads for those who have to use their cars for a variety of reasons. The use of public transport also benefits the more efficient movement of freight and of course there are environmental benefits.

So he's implying that more services, means more people using trains. But, how many will use it if they put the price up?

He's also saying, more train users will make it better for the private motorists and freight who continue to use the roads.

So rail users are being asked to pay more to subsidise the private mototorists who choose the most environmentally unfriendly methods of transport, and to subsidise business?

 
At 21/2/11 2:21 am, Blogger libertyscott said...

Let's separate capex and opex. All of Auckland rail capex is subsidised, so that is a good 100%. On operating costs you can't find international examples of trains being cheaper than buses. I have caught trains in Auckland, I caught them even long before the ARC even gave a damn about them, because they were better than getting a bus from town to Henderson. The history of rail in Auckland is tragic, as it wasn't until the late 1990s that Auckland councils gave a damn about the legacy rail network, regardless of political persuasion. Auckland got a massive uplift in road infrastructure (its choice, as Auckland City Council abandoned its trams in 1956) in the 50s, 60s and 70s. If you really want to talk about the region that has done badly in transport it is Canterbury, for its roads are cheap to maintain and it pays the same as everyone else. The one that gets the most subsidies is the West Coast which is hardly surprising given climate, topography and traffic volumes.

On Islamism my issue is the distinct lack of care if the dictatorships in the Middle East simply turn into new ones that will be just as appalling or worse for their people. Beyond posturing, surely you agree?

Ta, I was lazy linking, but no excuse you're quite right.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home