Why blaming migrants for Auckland public transport woes would not help?

The recent unfortunate incident of finding a human body near the Papatoetoe train station on Wednesday, July 26, and the accompanying chaos in transporting commuters to their respective destinations has ‘quietly’ brought to attention the burning question of resilience in Auckland’s public transport system.

Quietly because, otherwise in the present election related high-decibel environment, almost every noise related to Auckland’s public transport and other infrastructural woes is intrinsically linked with – immigration – and the “record level of immigrants” arriving in New Zealand’s largest city.

As if we all have collectively become intellectually challenged to some extent to mull about these issues without relating them to immigration in any manner.

In that regard, it was a bit refreshing to be able to spare a thought about Auckland’s public transport system without having to put the blame on immigrants, though the context was completely unfortunate and unwarranted.

The question of resilience is important because defined in a simple way resilience is the ability to survive a crisis and to thrive in a world of uncertainty. City planners and decision makers might want to reserve the question of resilience for a situation or a crisis involving gravity of a higher magnitude called as a hazard.

However, from an ordinary commuter’s perspective, a situation of this magnitude would also merit the question of resilience as it has the potential to cause major disruptions in their day to day life.

According to reports in the media, the incident was reported at around 7.30 a.m. requiring the attention of the police and emergency services and disrupting train services till about 10.30 a.m. when normalcy was restored – thus bringing to the fore the issue of resilience in the public transport system.

A three hour long disruption in the city’s public transport system that claims to be a fast growing global city, especially during the peak hours of commuting, is not an ideal situation for anyone.

It is also not the best reflection of the way we are preparing our public transport system for the future, especially the resilience part. 

A similar situation in a Melbourne train station earlier this month requiring police attention (though not involving any injury or death) caused only a thirty-five minute delay and a better response of alternate travel arrangements for the commuters.

In comparison to that, there was major chaos and wait time for commuters in the Papatoetoe incident before bouncing back to normalcy.

For many, this will be a question of the fact of single rail lines, which is again linked to question of (or lack of) investments, or differing priorities (between train and bus as the main carriers of Auckland’s people) or at best it could be a choice between ‘steady growth’ versus ‘rapid growth’ proposals.

Apparently, the government in 2007 had noted that a 'steady growth' (of public transport spending and infrastructure construction) was favoured over the 'rapid growth' proposals advocated by Auckland area leaders such as Papakura District mayor John Robertson, because the associated costs, raised by means such as a regional fuel tax, might put too much financial pressure on Auckland.

Since then a lot of water has gone under the bridge.

What has remained permanent is that Auckland’s public transport system seems to be growing, almost aimlessly, with too many ideas floating around and without much concerted action.

Often it appears that the question of Auckland’s public transport is caught up or paralysed amidst ongoing clutter of ideas and noises that are believed to have stopped our planners and decision makers from taking decisive actions to improve - and “record level of immigration numbers” is one such idea that has seemingly obscured our ability to think clearly on public transport.

In contrast, there are multiple issues in the complex planning and administration of public transport that also need attention.