Bus routes face the axe

Six Christchurch bus routes serving thousands of people could be axed and fares increased to plug a

$4 million public transport funding hole.

Disabled people could be hit in the pocket under the proposal, which would spell cuts to a travel subsidy scheme.

The plans come amid a mooted

4.5 per cent annual increase in Environment Canterbury (ECan) rates for the next three years to help the regional council fund its forthcoming 10-year plan. The plan will shape its management of the region’s freshwater and its approach to biodiversity, air quality, ongoing environmental risks and transport.

Bus use in Christchurch was hit hard by the earthquake seven years ago. Journey numbers have never recovered to more than 80 per cent of pre-2011 figures.

Just 35 per cent of people in the city used public transport in the past year, according to the Ministry of Transport, compared with 60 per cent in Auckland, 77 per cent in Wellington and 40 per cent nationally.

Some bus routes are so unprofitable that only 10 per cent of the cost of running them is covered by fares – meaning ratepayers subsidise each passenger journey by up to $20. Adult fares in zone one cost

$4 ($2.55 with a Metrocard) and

$5.50 in zone two ($3.75 with a Metrocard).

ECan, which is responsible for public transport, proposes three options to meet the shortfall, currently paid for by NZTA and ECan reserves, within a year of being implemented. Under the regional council’s preferred option, the six lowest-performing routes would be scrapped.

They are 107, from Styx Mill to Northlands; 108, from Casebrook to Northlands; 135, from Burwood Hospital to New Brighton; 145, from Westmorland to Eastgate;

150, from The Palms to Spencerville; 535, from Eastgate to Lyttelton and Rapaki.

About 13.4 million journeys are taken every year on buses in Greater Christchurch – most on the city’s Orbiter route, which sees

2.3m annual passenger movements, accounting for 17.11 per cent of all bus travel.

The best-performing route is the purple line, which has 1.3m journeys and recoups 59.1 per cent of costs from fares.

In contrast, the six routes under threat account for just 2.3 per cent of all bus travel between them, some 307,000 journeys.

Only 13,000 journeys were taken on the 150 bus last year, while the

135 makes back less than 10 per cent of costs from fares.

The move has upset bus users, with some questioning its fairness.

Trish Mclean, 60, has used bus 135 every week for the past 10 years to get from her North Beach home to the shops in New Brighton. She told The Press that without it she would have to walk 30 minutes to a different bus stop.

She said: ‘‘I don’t think it’s fair. A lot of people don’t drive . . . I have trouble walking now with arthritis, so there’s no way I could walk there every week. I just hope they don’t do it.’’

As well as axing services, ECan plans to increase its annual bus fare revenue by 2.5 per cent for each of the next three years, meaning fares could rise by five to 15 cents per trip.

A larger portion of rates paid to ECan could be earmarked for public transport. A ‘‘free transfer window’’ on the Timaru bus network would reduce from four to two hours.

Maximum subsidies per vehicle trip for the Total Mobility scheme, which helps people with long-term impairments access transport, could be slashed from $35 to $30, a move ECan said would affect 3 per cent of trips.

ECan chairman Steve Lowndes said ‘‘underperforming routes’’ were among several factors affecting bus network sustainability.

‘‘On some of the lowestperforming routes ratepayers are subsidising each passenger trip by up to $20. We need to look at how we are providing the service in these areas. The public transport service is an essential part of our community.

‘‘We need to ensure we can operate it in a financially sustainable way . . . provide the best possible . . . [and] be open to new thinking and innovation that will play a part in public transport over the next 10 years.’’

The proposals will provide ammunition to the Christchurch City Council, which has longwanted to wrest control of public transport from ECan.

Other options to save money would see the same cutting of routes and reduction of the Total Mobility subsidy, but with an even greater portion of rates being used for public transport – a move that would protect fares from rising in the short term.

A third plan would see routes axed and the mobility subsidy reduced alongside an increase in fares of 5 per cent over the next year and by 21⁄2 per cent each following year, along with a 1.51 per cent rise in rates.

ECan conceded people will be affected irrespective of which proposal is adopted. That consultation, which will be approved by councillors tomorrow, invites feedback on ECan’s long-term plan from February 26, before public hearings from April 30 to May 2.

‘‘I don’t think it’s fair. A lot of people don’t drive . . . I have trouble walking now with arthritis.’’

Regular bus 135 user