Port only reason Auckland exists
Don’t let area become wasteland of tourist paraphernalia and coffee shops, writes Rob Wightman
Auckland’s port is the city’s engine. Auckland is the engine of New Zealand. Destroy the port and New Zealand will become a tourist “latte land” of wasted opportunity.
I like the port’s 30-year plan. I don’t agree with it all, there is more that can be done but at least the future is being addressed.
Chief executive Tony Gibson refers to his owner being the Auckland Council. I would argue, as do most, that the Auckland Council is owned by the people of Auckland. As such it is the Auckland ratepayers who will decide. It’s our money and our future, it is not for a here today, gone tomorrow mayor to decide.
For Phil Goff to air his personal opinions in his role as Mayor is, to me, a conflict of interest. He is there to support the majority, whether he agrees with the proposals or not.
Further, we cannot have what comes in and out of our ports decided by individuals or minority activists who appear to have no concern beyond their own personal horizons. I am pretty certain the majority of voters, the silent majority if you like, do not want to see their port dismantled and turned into a wasteland of tourist paraphernalia and coffee shops.
We and our mayor need to be reminded that the only reason Auckland exists is the port. I have watched with amazement the suggestions for alternative ports. First a surfer’s beach, with great waves arriving from thousands of kilometres away. Quickly followed by a west coast port with a shallow bar that regularly kills boaties, and a firth that does have deep water but a good kilometre off the beach, and with no protection from the weather.
The latest options are little better. Tauranga is a successful port, it has grown and can accommodate most vessels. However, they too have limited room for expansion, they are already regularly dredging the channel to accommodate those bigger ships. And why should the good people of Tauranga be inflicted with Auckland’s castoffs, and the cost of expanding their motorways and upgrading their railway to make Auckland a “prettier place”?
The same goes for Whangarei. Once past the oil terminal and the logging wharf, there is nothing for deep water oceangoing vessels. Don’t even think about dredging. That would be expensive, continuous and very unpopular. Even then the jobs created would be competed for by displaced Aucklanders, so there would be little local benefit there.
State Highway 1 in Northland, which already has a death rate higher than most roads, would have to be upgraded, the railway straightened, re-routed and rebuilt to a practical gauge (track width) that would allow fast transport from Northland. That transport would still have to go through Auckland to reach southern destinations.
Water depth and draft restrictions at these locations have never been mentioned in the media yet they are a crucial requirement for any port, along with the safe haven the ships need.
Larger passenger ships can get into Auckland. Anchoring out in the stream is what cargo and passenger ships used to do while waiting their turn at the berths. Passenger ships of any size have the launches and ferries available to land their passengers. A large passenger ship anchored in the middle of the Waitemata is a beautiful sight. Been there, done that.
I’m not sure what the conservationists hope to achieve by banning further expansion into Auckland’s vast and beautiful harbour. There is plenty of space for everyone and all activities. But if they have their way it seems New Zealand, not just Auckland, will sink back into the mediocrity of yesterday, with a “pretty” harbour for orca, dolphins and the occasional island-stranded kiwi. Plus, of course, the continuing ability to hunt snapper to extinction.
Fellow Aucklanders, the solution is clear — rearrange the wharves as necessary, take the extra infill as needed, but only as needed. However, what would make a real difference is not the siphoning of Auckland’s lifeblood to other ports, but the construction of a proper motorway and railway through Auckland from North to South.
A new motorway built on supports above the existing SH1 from about Albany in the north to Papakura in the south, with just two public on/off ramps between. One to the port, and another to Auckland Airport. Yes, and over the Harbour Bridge as well. Then local traffic stays on the ground, and through traffic plus port traffic goes over the top — non-stop.
The knowledge and expertise is out there. The US and Europe have been doing it for decades. It won’t be easy, but anything worthwhile is rarely easy, and Kiwis, with All Black-esque determination, have always relished a challenge.