Brian Rudman

The public transport reforms revealed today are hardly the revolutionary changes the Auckland Regional Transport Authority (Arta) has been pushing for. Indeed the proposed new purchaser-provider mode doesn't even restore the status quo, replaced in 1991 by the disastrous Thatcherite model that has subsequently dogged Auckland's bus system for 15 years.

But at least it's a start, and a sign that our latest Transport Minister, Annette King, means business. Also, the word from within Arta is that it can live with this watered-down version of its proposal.

The good news is that once the legislation is in place, Arta - and the other public transport authorities around the country - will again be able to impose some basic conditions of service on all their operators. Insisting that buses and trains and ferries keep to their timetables, for instance. And that rival operators join together to provide an integrated ticketing service that enables passengers to mix and match modes of travel using the same ticket. Transport operators will also have to open their books so the public authority can inspect just how much they need the subsidies they request.

The downside is that there'll be a time lag while old contracts run out, before the new controls can fully kick in. That's unless the private bus companies have a sudden rush of public spiritedness to the head, and voluntarily sign up before they are forced to. But given recent histrionics, it's hard to contemplate that happening.

In the speculative fever that built up before today's announcement, major operator Infratil indulged in some spectacular public foot-stamping and dummy-spitting, threatening to quit the industry at the thought that Arta's desired reform package might win the day. What Arta wanted was a simple contracting model, where it, the public purchaser of the service, on behalf of you and me, designed the most suitable integrated public transport network for the region and then called for tenders from operators to provide the service.

To Infratil, this proposition was "extremely unattractive".

Of course, to Arta and other local authorities it was the existing model that was extremely unattractive. They pointed to the fact that Britain was the only other country in the world employing such a system. That most civilised cities used the simple contracting model they were proposing.

The worst aspect of the existing system is that an operator can identify a certain popular route - or more often, the most profitable rush-hour timeslots on that route - trot off to the relevant authority and register it as a "commercial" service. Once done, this becomes the operator's own personal fiefdom. Unless the back wheels of a bus regularly fall off, or the driver does unspeakable things to his passengers, there's very little the authorities can do. They can't for instance, insist on buses keeping to a timetable. In Auckland, 26 per cent of bus services, carrying around 46 per cent of all passengers, are in these unpoliceable commercial wildlands.

Annette King's proposed reforms do bring these 46 per cent of Auckland passengers back under regulatory protection. Even though operators will still be able to register "commercial" routes, they will be forced to agree to and abide by the regulatory conditions imposed by Arta. Requirements, for instance, that they have to turn up on time every day. And that they agree to honour a valid ticket sold by a rival operator at an earlier stage of the passenger's journey.

In the interests of the network at large, "commercial" operators will no longer be allowed to cherry-pick the most profitable rush-hour slots. They will have to service the slower middle-of-the-day and evening runs as well.

Given how slow transport reform can be - even under a Government which trumpets its commitment to the cause - the vagueness of the timetable for the changeover to the new regime is worrying. A briefing paper says "commercial operators will still be able to operate existing commercial services, but will, over time, have to comply with any regional passenger transport plan controls".

Given the ability of both local authorities and commercial firms under threat to prolong the inevitable, let's hope a more prescriptive deadline for the reforms kicking in is part of the final legislation.

Buried deep in Helen Clark's speech from the throne earlier this week was a hint that Auckland's long fight to persuade the Government to electrify the suburban rail network could be won. Referring to the "increasingly important" need "to align central and regional strategies for Auckland transport", the Prime Minister added that "timelines around rail electrification will need to be agreed on ... "

This is the first time the Government has conceded electrification will take place. There have been hints, but never anything as definite as this.

The last came almost a year ago, in a letter from Finance Minister Michael Cullen to regional council chairman Mike Lee, where he effectively flushed the dream of electrification down the drain. Dr Cullen said, "The clear implication of this is that electrification would not be in place for, at the very least, the next eight years".

But even this was not a clear commitment to electrify, only notice that the issue could be relitigated sometime in the future. Presumably well after replacement diesel trains had been ordered.

Since then, the lobbying from Auckland only intensified. The Treasury responded with its favourite delaying tactic - consultation. This only increased Auckland's determination. Last November a report from the Auckland Transport Strategic Alignment Project informed the Government that every stakeholder and territorial authority in Auckland were united behind electrification.

The message seems to have got through with Helen Clark referring to it as a done deal, the only debating point being "timelines".

Perhaps a grateful Auckland could name the first electric locomotive in honour of defrocked minister Taito Phillip Field. For if there's anything likely to give the electrification programme a nudge, it's Labour having to rely on Green Party support to see legislation passed. And the Greens are great supporters of electrifying rail in Auckland. Indeed they're happy for motorway funds to be used.

The Government having to cosy-up to the Greens might also embolden proposed reforms to public transport procurement legislation which the Prime Minister also foreshadowed in her speech. The planned reforms, she said, had "the objective of enabling regional councils to get better value for money in their public transport". The Auckland Regional Transport Authority wants a reform of the contracting system between itself and private operators so it can design an integrated transport network that works best for the customer rather than at present, the operators.

Currently private operators can cherry-pick the most profitable routes, declaring them "commercial" services. ARTA is then left to call for tenders for subsidised services to fill the gaps. ARTA cannot impose or enforce performance standards on the commercial routes. Nor can it introduce integrated ticketing.

ARTA wants a new contracting model, in which it sets up an integrated transport network and contracts an operator or operators to provide the service.

The outburst from Tim Brown, a director of Auckland's main bus operator, Infratil, over the weekend, suggests ARTA's submission may have fallen on receptive ears in Wellington. Mr Brown threatened Infratil would exit the industry if ARTA's proposals were adopted. Hopefully with the Greens now there to buttress Government resolve, Mr Brown's scaremongering will have no impact on the proposed legislation. We should know soon. Details are expected to be announced any day.

While the Greens' new influence in Wellington can only be helpful as far as Auckland public transport reforms are concerned, the same can't be said for those hoping for revolutionary changes to local government.

Helen Clark noted that "the Government is currently considering its response to the region's proposals for strengthening its governance". The word from Wellington is that the consensus agreed to by Auckland's local authorities last December was so bland that Government doesn't see the point of legislating. Instead of reducing the number of bodies running Auckland, the consensus model adds an advisory Regional Sustainable Development Forum to the mix. The regional council would gain a little more power.

Into the mix now come the Greens who regard calls by reformers for a supercity "an affront to democracy". They want more power for community boards. My guess is there'll be no governance reform this year.