Has the proposed new Dunedin bus fare system gone far enough, asks Peter Dowden.
It's hard not to like the proposed generously funded simplification of the bus ticketing system. Commuters as far away as Mosgiel and Port Chalmers will have their rides reduced to a straightforward flat fare of $2, which will include a free transfer to a second bus on the way.
A convenient new card will allow passengers to tag themselves on and off the bus, speeding up loading and providing bus managers with valuable travel data.
Buried in the detail of this rejig of fares are some sharp increases that must not be overlooked. Tertiary students and passengers with disabilities will have their fare discounts abolished and merged in with the general adult population. Long-distance travellers in this category will still be better off but those travelling a shorter distance, within one "zone" under the present system, get a hefty 16% increase.
But it is school pupils who face the steepest fare hike. Travel to a child’s nearest school by bus will soar by 30%. This is an unprecedented price gouge. The Otago Regional Council has never, in all the years since its foundation in 1986, inflated anyone’s bus fare by so much.
The child fare increase ups the cost of education by $35 a term, or $140 a year. And that’s just for one child. For three children, a family will need to find another $105 per term out of existing budgets. If uniforms or school books went up by this sort of amount, we would all be hearing about it. It is a stunning act to bring forward this sort of increase during a pandemic crisis that Standard and Poor’s calls a "severe economic and fiscal shock to New Zealand", finance minister Grant Robertson calls a "quantum economic shock" and World Bank president David Malpass calls a "devastating blow" and a "catastrophe".
The flat fare system is praised by the Otago Regional Council as "easier" and "simpler" as if families would rather pay a nice round figure for their travel than save a few cents per trip. Perhaps they perceive the public as asking "please sir, round up our fares to a nice round figure to make the arithmetic easier." (The nicest, roundest figure of all is zero, which the regional council is charging everyone at the moment, showing how the once unthinkable concept of free travel for all can be realised.)
The way the benefits of this big spend of taxpayers’ and ratepayers’ funds are proposed to be distributed does not bear much political analysis. A traveller with a disability has to pay $7.50 more per month to attend daily training or treatment. A student travelling from High St to the university pays $21 more a semester, while a professor from Highgrove pays $63 less. It costs a family in Kinmont $35 more per term to send their teenager to Taieri College but $33 less to send her to Columba College.
And why are we charging children anything to travel to their nearest school? Most parts of Otago are served by free, fully taxpayer-funded rural school buses for their children.
Our regional councillors need to consider carefully who is missing out under this generally excellent proposal. The public has an opportunity to tell the regional council how they feel. Short-distance travellers would be advised to put in a submission on the ORC website.
- Peter Dowden is a Dunedin bus driver and public transport lobbyist.
Related Stories
Comments
But it is not about being fair, it's all about trying to increase passenger numbers and the distance they travel so that they can justify having so many large, old, heavily polluting buses on the road. Oh and winning votes of course.
Pat.
Learn your facts.. majority of Dunedin buses are less than 2 years old and Euro 5.
The point of efficient and cheap public transport is to remove thise old cars from our cities.
Clearly you are uninformed and ignorant of whats trying to be achieved.
Strange response on a fairly mundane issue such as bussing don't you think? Uniformed and ignorant? He has a different opinion...so what! Sounds like your another one of these mouth breathing anti car zealots. Regardless of your opinion, I will never ride a bus, like many other people in Dunedin. I saved and purchased a car so I don't have to ride the bus. I enjoy the freedom of coming and going as I see fit. You like the bus...great, ride the bus to you hearts content and leave those of us who detest bus's alone. I won't be shamed into giving up my car.
It may be 'mundane' to you, Alright Jack, but it's life and death to some poor blighters.
I might be wrong here, but I'm pretty sure the writer was referring to the ferral response on what is unarguably a dull and mundane subject. Based upon your response I assume you read something else into it?There is a certain nuance to the written word that some people have great difficulty comprehending. Reading slowly typically eliminates those problems over time. Maybe give it a try?
Are you sure! I think you may be telling porkies! However I am a very open minded person and if my facts are wrong I am willing to applogise. Please can you direct me to be source of your information? As well as average fleet age, other facts that would be of interest are litres of fossil fuel used, passenger numbers and average distance traveled by passengers. With this information we might be able to work out the environmental footprint and how that compares to other forms of transport. I'm not against buses but having breathed in their toxic fumes, watched them continually cross the centre line on our local steep twisty roads and earlier this year witness one catch fire and dump oil and engine parts all over the road, I can't help thinking maybe some people are just trying to make a square peg fit into a round hole. Time to start thinking for the future, huge dirty diesel buses are not it.
Nice try there Steve, you have no idea what you're talking about! Euro 5 has a variety of problems. Specifically, large emissions of PN on regenerating tests during this testing programme indicated that a different approach must be taken to effectively regulate regenerative emissions of gaseous pollutants and PN. Did you even bother to consider emissions limits, for any of the regulated pollutants, do not apply during laboratory or RDE tests if a DPF regeneration occurs? No! Euro 5 results have been rejected due to the use of K factors. The use of K factors to account for high emissions due to DPF regeneration allows emissions limits to be exceeded. Yes, exceeded! This plus the PN emissions from regeneration are not regulated by K factors so PN emissions limits don’t even apply on regenerating tests. Did you mention that? No! Lastly, The WLTP based procedure for determining K factors is unrepresentative of real-world driving. The K factors are nothing more than a guess. You might want to apologize for the ignorance you demonstrated on the topic!
What it's about is climate change and helping those who do not wish or cannot afford to drive vehicles around cities. Cheap or free public transport is essential right now. This $2 proposal is great! As the ORC state 'For some of our passengers' fares will increase, whilst for others, they will decrease.' Not good enough. This is the 'Glaring Anomaly'.