Ferry sweary

Written By: - Date published: 9:08 am, June 27th, 2024 - 45 comments
Categories: climate change, Environment, grant robertson, infrastructure, national, nz first, public transport, same old national, transport - Tags:

The Government is in a rather precarious position relating to the contract to replace the ageing Cook Straight ferries, which clearly need replacing.

The last Labour Government had a difficult time with the issue. The contract to replace the ferries with modern rail enabled ferries clearly was the right decision.

But the need to make sure that Wellington and Picton wharves were up to scratch and optimal made the decision more complex and more expensive.

You would think however that making sure that they are earthquake proof and climate change proof was something that should happen anyway. Perhaps Grant Robertson was right to push back on the actual scale and cost of the project. But it really feels like something that should be business as usual not something that could be avoided.

This Government chose to go to town on the issue and claim they were better financial managers and could save us all of this money and get a useable Toyota Corolla instead of the Rolls Royce they were depicting the new ferries as being.

But the recent grounding of the Aratere showed what bad shape the ferries are in and how vital it is that replacements should be obtained as soon as possible. This event clearly showed that the decision to purchase new ferries was the right one and they cannot arrive soon enough.

There are a couple of twists to the story.

The Government’s language around ending the contract is loose and the reality is there is something between a unilateral repudiation and a furious renegotiation around the scope of the project.

This has made us an international Banana Republic laughing stock. Who would do business with a sovereign state that will welch on contracts just to gain a political advantage over its rival? Good luck to National to find a firm to construct the ferries and deliver them in the near future.

And there are hints that behind the scenes there is a furious fight between anti rail forces in National and pro rail forces in New Zealand First.

Clearly National does not like the fact that the ferries are so rail enabled and will contribute so much to the rail system.

Why else would you appoint an advisory board that includes a director of a trucking firm and Auckland airport, the Nelson Airport Chief Executive, and a former National MP? Where is the rail expertise? Where is the advocate for sustainable and future focussed transport systems?

National is also dumping all over Kiwirail. Ad is right in contending that Kiwirail or aspects of it could be prepared for sale.

This is a big test of the Government’s commitment to use the power of the state to protect and upgrade the country’s important infrastructure. I get the horrible feeling they will fail miserably.

45 comments on “Ferry sweary ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Anne 1
    27 June 2024 at 9:45 am

    Who would do business with a sovereign state that will welch on contracts just to gain a political advantage over its rival?

    This is the crux of the argument. A bunch of disparate adults intent upon gaining power, are prepared to dump everything the previous government achieved for puerile, petty and vindictive electoral one-up-man-ship. It is more than enough to banish them from the treasury benches.

    It is also high time Labour rose to the occasion and spelt these betrayals out in forthright language that the voters understand. Academic discourse is fine for those who undertake serious research on such matters [as we see daily on this site] but it means nothing to the average voter. It is a lesson some in Labour still badly need to learn.

    • Tiger Mountain 1.1
      27 June 2024 at 10:00 am

      Agree, it is time to start gut punching the CoC Govt.

      These vandals may well oversee the severing of significant maritime/rail links between North and South Islands, unthinkable really with the geography of our nation.

    • gsays 1.3
      27 June 2024 at 12:10 pm

      To add to the picture of economic ineptitude.

      I have been reliably informed the taxpayer is paying an on-going fee for the storage of the steel that is sitting in the ship builder's yard.

      National's management of the economy is up there with the tooth fairy and Father Christmas.

    • James Simpson 1.4
      27 June 2024 at 12:58 pm

      I am not convinced that a Labour government would have done things differently in the past 6 months.

      The first time the government asked Kiwirail to consider their options was in July 2023 by the then Finance Minister Grant Robertson. He was clearly concerned with the project, after he was asked for a further substantial top up from Kiwirail.

      The Treasury then provided this advice to the new government in November:

      “Officials are of the view Project iReX no longer represents good value for money, and that lower cost alternatives more closely aligned to KiwiRail’s current business model have yet to be fully explored.

      Both governments were clearly concerned with the mounting project costs and they they were both asking their officials to consider options.

      • James Noble 1.4.1
        27 June 2024 at 10:04 pm

        Asking officials to consider options is one thing.

        cancelling the contracts before you know what those options are is something else entirely

  2. ianmac 2
    27 June 2024 at 10:01 am

    "Has the Contract been cancelled?" the Opposition asked.

    Answer equivocal. Huh?

    As for the Advisory Board! Conflict of interest?

  3. Mike the Lefty 3
    27 June 2024 at 11:06 am

    The talk about "Toyota Corolla" instead of "Rolls Royce" is simply National political rhetoric and bears no relationship to the actual problem.

    The problem is that the Cook Strait ferry rail freight system has become a vital part of NZ's transport network. If ever there was a "road of national significance" this is it.

    To try and save money by making new ferries that are not rail capable will slow down freight movement between the two islands heaps, because everything will have to be loaded into smaller capacity trucks.

    It will also increase freight costs, which inevitably will be passed onto the consumer, when National were pledging at the last election to lower the cost of living, not raise it.

    National are playing a political game here – and the losers will of course be us!

    • Graeme 3.1
      27 June 2024 at 11:36 am

      Kite flying and cat (deceased) swinging is how the Nats develop policy and construct consensus.

      The Key government played that way for nine years.

      They freaked at where the costs project were going and tried to find a cheaper way. To be fair Robertson was asking questions too. They might find a cheaper option, they might not

      • mpledger 3.1.1
        27 June 2024 at 11:42 am

        The problem is that people devoid of any maritime knowledge are going to choose the cheap option over the option that has the essential features. And noone with the right knowledge to choose will be listened too.

  4. Ad 4
    27 June 2024 at 11:48 am

    Kiwirail needs to be merged inside NZTA as part of an agency.

    Being a Crown corporation enables all politicians to pick it apart. As it is now. And avoids another set of political appointments.

    The merger should be Green and Labour manifesto.

    Would need MoT to be beefed up as rail regulator.

    But otherwise reflects current Auckland integrated operations at ATOC.

    And enables full road-rail efficiency as a single system. And heads towards tracking full rail+car electrification of NZ.

  5. tsmithfield 5
    27 June 2024 at 12:05 pm

    The government canned the project because an additional 1.47 billion was requested for the project above what had been budgeted.

    That is a huge amount of money that could go into health or any other critical function that kiwis need. At some point any government will pull the pin if the blowout is big enough. Mickey, if $1.47 billion wasn't a big enough blowout to cancel the project, then what blowout would be large enough for you to cancel it? Because there would be a point where it is just getting too expensive.

    Another issue is that the existing ferries had been required to go slow through Queen Charlotte sound due to the effect of wash on the shore line. I can only assume the wash from much larger vessels would even be worse. Hence, they may not have been viable from an environmental standpoint anyway.

    I don't think anyone disagrees the existing ferries need replacing. But, I think the most sensible option is to replace them with newer ferries equivalent to the ones we already have. Plus, I think increased use of coastal shipping is something that also needs to be explored to reduce the amount of road freight.

    • gsays 5.1
      27 June 2024 at 12:15 pm

      You are being a tad disingenuous conflating the ferry build with $1.4B.

      Most acknowledge the price for the ferries ($551M, from memory), was a very good price.

      Where the 'blowout' came about was from the infrastructure build. That is happening because after 40 years of neo liberalism the state no longer has the capacity to build basic infrastructure.

      If the NAct coalition was half as good as they claim, they could streamline the process and get it done.
      In reality they know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

      • David 5.1.1
        27 June 2024 at 12:36 pm

        The blowout is due to the total package, this includes the new ships as well as the port infrastructure at both ports. The new ships are much larger than the current ships.

        Im in no way a shipping expert, so I don’t have any knowledgeable opinion on what size ships we should be using. However since the’90’s there has been regular commentary regarding the environmental impact of large ships (current sized ferries as well) have through the sounds on the way to Picton.

        This may be a odd question, but would freight ferries from Wellington to the port close to Christchurch be a better alternative? I’m sure most of the freight southbound is headed to Christchurch and further south.

        • gsays 5.1.1.1
          27 June 2024 at 1:51 pm

          Christchurch could well be a netter alternative along with further bolstered coastal shipping.

          As to blowout see BGs comment below.

          This is a multi-generational investment. Worth twice as much as the ticket price.

        • William 5.1.1.2
          27 June 2024 at 3:12 pm

          Lyttelton port is about 11 or 12 hours sailing time from Wellington, so to provide the same capacity there would need to be maybe three times as many ships, or much larger ships. That's a big extra capital outlay that is merely duplicating the existing rail line and road. Larger ships would of course require new shore facilities at both ends, Lyttelton would need a new terminal anyway. Sounds similar (but magnified) to the situation that caused Nicolla Willis have conniptions six months ago.

        • aj 5.1.1.3
          27 June 2024 at 5:41 pm

          Current ferry length range from 150m to 182m. The new ones apparently 40m longer. Larger cruise ships measure up to 300m.

          Speed generating wake in the sounds is an issue for all large vessels and is tightly regulated for both safety and environmental reasons. As it is in any harbor area.

          The CoC is stoking up misinformation around all aspects of the previous governments (wise) decision to upgrade these ferries. Unfortunately it's all about politics, not the long-term benefits to New Zealand.

    • Bearded Git 5.2
      27 June 2024 at 12:26 pm

      We all need to stop framing the ferries in terms of "cost blowout" and look at reality.

      The $3 billion price tag for two new state of the art large and rail capable ferries and associated infrastructure that will serve NZ for several generations on the most important transport link in NZ is PEANUTS when compared with the $16.5 billion the COC is proposing to spend on RONS.

      Gordon Campbell gets it right as usual, especially:

      "The decision taken last December to cancel the contract for the two purpose-built Cook Strait ferries – without having a Plan B in mind, let alone in place – has been a calamity that’s going to haunt New Zealand for decades to come, long after the Luxon government has been consigned to the dustbin of history. The contract …had locked in the building cost for ferries large enough (a) to carry rail economically and (b) carry passengers in relative comfort. Crucially, the vessels would have been big and sturdy enough to handle the constant hammering from Cook Strait’s fierce weather conditions, for the next 30 years or so."

      http://werewolf.co.nz/2024/06/gordon-campbell-on-cancer-drugs-and-the-great-ferries-cancellation-disaster-of-23/

    • joe90 5.3
      27 June 2024 at 12:39 pm

      At some point any government will pull the pin if the blowout is big enough.

      Wonder how much of the cost blowout was associated with ferries and passenger facilities and how much was associated with other functions.

      Ad station and system design, we have pointed out that stations for Second Avenue Subway Phase 1 dug a cavern twice as long as necessary for the train, for the benefit of extensive back-of-the-house spaces, where in non-UK Europe and in China, the digs are typically a single-digit percent longer than the train.

      […]

      The same is true when nobody bothers to say no as each operating department demands more back-of-the-house space until half the station dig is about providing high-cost underground break rooms and storage rather than about providing space for trains and passenger circulation.

      https://pedestrianobservations.com/2024/06/22/meme-weeding-high-wages-and-baumols-cost-disease/

    • Ad 5.4
      27 June 2024 at 1:05 pm

      It was cheap.

      Only gets expensive when you leave it for a couple of decades.

      Will now get more expensive.

      • tsmithfield 5.4.1
        27 June 2024 at 2:16 pm

        Ad, I am not convinced the large ferries will ever be a solution.

        A few decades back there was a major issue with ferries causing wash that was eroding beaches etc. Hence the ferries had to slow down.

        Surely even bigger ferries will cause a larger wake. Thus, the erosion issues are likely to make the speed they can travel untenable through Queen Charlotte Sound.

        Unless they go to moving the ferries out of Picton There was a proposal that for that option a number of years ago. To somewhere near Blenheim I think. I can't remember exactly.

        • Ad 5.4.1.1
          27 June 2024 at 2:31 pm

          Yes they examined Clifford Bay, over about a decade. It was dead even before the Kaikoura Earthquake truly buried the idea.

          Also Nelson is way too shallow.

          We're not going to shift our core exports by plane ever, and we won't ever have a bridge or tunnel connecting us.

          2 rail capable ferries, with Bluebridge doing some passenger and some domestic freight, is as optimal as you're going to get.

          • tsmithfield 5.4.1.1.1
            27 June 2024 at 2:56 pm

            I think coastal shipping would be a great addition. This would reduce a lot of trucks on the road which would be a great thing.

            • Tony Veitch 5.4.1.1.1.1
              27 June 2024 at 4:18 pm

              Coastal shipping will never be an option when you consider how much the truck lobby (in various forms) donates to the CoC!

        • Simbit 5.4.1.2
          27 June 2024 at 5:18 pm

          Remember the court case (two UC geog lecturers testified, for opposite sides I recall). The solution was noted above: Lyttleton. (Took this ferry in '74). Smaller ferries for Marlborough/Nelson passengers. But agree with other comments re: canceling a large contract. Corporate negotiators follow the basic headlines read the tea leaves and will push up gossip through their personal professional networking. I'd add 10% to even pick up the phone.

        • bwaghorn 5.4.1.3
          27 June 2024 at 5:30 pm

          It was the high speed cats doing the damage, but I expect you know that.

          • joe90 5.4.1.3.1
            27 June 2024 at 6:17 pm

            Cracker memory there, bwags

            N.Z.Rail was sold, purchased by the American multi-national Wisconsin Rail and re-named, Tranz Rail. Unfortunately, the 14-knot speed limit agreement was dishonoured and discontinued.

            1994 saw the introduction of the ‘Albeyzen’, a high speed mono-hull, by a company called Sea Shuttle, owned by Brooke Mckenzie and capable of travelling at 36 knots or more. Tranz Rail saw this as a serious threat to their monopoly, moved quickly and leased the ‘Lynx’, a first-generation high-speed catamaran capable of travelling at 38 knots. This was the beginning of a new era in shipping, one that everyone was excited about. New technology: We are all fascinated by speed.

            The buzz didn’t last long however. Because of the size of their wake, the effects the new “fast ferries” had on the environment and the threat to human safety were catastrophic!

            http://www.guardiansofthesounds.co.nz/2008/ferries/fast-ferry-debacle-in-the-queen-charlotte-sounds/

            • I Feel Love 5.4.1.3.1.1
              27 June 2024 at 7:15 pm

              Travelled on the Lynx a few times, it was quick, 1 & a half hours sometimes less, couldn't stand outside without falling over holding onto something.

            • bwaghorn 5.4.1.3.1.2
              27 June 2024 at 8:24 pm

              Fun while it lasted

              • I Feel Love …
                27 June 2024 at 10:14 pm

                It was, & the wake was huge. The first time I travelled on it I saw a guy outside in full wet weather gear, the big yellow hat everything, like he was on top of an oil rig thinking the guy was an eccentric or whatever, then when the ferry really got going & we all had to leave the deck the guy was hanging on the rail the whole trip laughing his head off having a blast.

    • bwaghorn 5.5
      27 June 2024 at 1:12 pm

      That is a huge amount of money that could go into health or any other critical function that kiwis need

      It's a shame it went into tax breaks for landlords then ain't it?

      • tsmithfield 5.5.1
        27 June 2024 at 2:37 pm

        You mean treating them just the same as other businesses?

        • Ed1 5.5.1.1
          27 June 2024 at 4:27 pm

          I agree T Smithfield. Our capital gains tax requirements do have a few exemptions, but the exemption for commercial investments by landlords is the most conspicuous exemption that has distorted our capital markets for a long time – to the detriment of investment in many of our local companies, and a shallow share market with a lot of overseas owners. That giving priority to increasing a major anomoly in our investment markets in favour of the incoming Prime Minister and other landlords and donors to the coalition parties is blatantly against the principles of tax neutrality that even those political parties have pretended to support in the past.

        • bwaghorn 5.5.1.2
          27 June 2024 at 5:28 pm

          Don't care houses are for living in not profiting from, labour did the right thing guiding investors into new builds and investing in productive sectors.

  6. Stephen D 6
    27 June 2024 at 4:05 pm

    A generation ago, Labour had a complete transport policy integrating coastal shipping, rail, and road. Who knows what happened to it?
    Fish hooks everywhere. Rationalising coastal ports, redeveloping railheads, fighting off the roading lobby.

  7. adam 7
    27 June 2024 at 5:32 pm

    Welcome to the Banana Republic of Nu Zild.

    Where idiocy of ideological purity is on full display.

  8. thinker 8
    27 June 2024 at 6:02 pm

    Seems to me the game is to make rail freight as uncompetitive as possible to trucks.

    Truckers, road building, oil, PPPs, would all be happy with ferries that can't easily do rail.

    • joe90 8.1
      27 June 2024 at 6:28 pm

      Stopped clocks etc etc..

      However, a former minister of railways, Richard Prebble, said ditching rail ferries could mean the end of New Zealand's rail freight altogether, as moving freight on and off trains would not be economic.

      And that would cost exporters, importers, industry, tourism and by extension the entire country, he said.

      "Without the rail, we'd be putting thousands of extra heavy trucks on our roads, which aren't built to take it.

      "The country's roads cannot take the heavy trucks that would be needed to shift freight from the North to South Island. It would cost hundreds of millions of dollars in extra funding for our roading network.

      "From an ordinary motorist's point of view, if you think it's hard being behind a heavy truck today, you're going to be stuck behind a queue of heavy trucks all the way from Auckland to Christchurch."

      https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/520436/aratere-ferry-failure-final-straw-for-residents-farmers-and-truckies

      • mac1 8.1.1
        27 June 2024 at 10:31 pm

        À propos of Richard Prebble, I heard him as Minister of Railways talking in Parliament about the stupid complaints he got in his mail box. One was from a commuter in Wellington who complained that every time he came in on the train all he saw were workmen leaning on their shovels. Prebble wrote back saying that it was not Railway policy to have men working on rail lines whilst trains travelled over them…..

        People with their 'reckons' instead of informed, thoughtful, researched and well-discussed policy!

    • Powerman 8.2
      28 June 2024 at 5:26 pm

      Thinker maybe to push privatisation of rail?

  9. Binders full of women 9
    27 June 2024 at 8:20 pm

    Julie Ann Genter and Dharleen Tana are the wise heads that can solve this crisis. They know transport.

    • Barfly 9.1
      28 June 2024 at 10:16 am

      /yawn

    • newsense 9.2
      29 June 2024 at 12:06 am

      This troll has made the same comment repeatedly without engaging in debate.

      And I believe at the salaries now on offer the public service couldn’t afford Julie Anne Genter.

  10. newsense 10
    29 June 2024 at 12:16 am

    Amazing to find out who is an expert in rail and coastal shipping amongst the RW interference runners!

    We badly badly badly need some quality satire.

    I do wonder though if the possibility of a hot air balloon service across Cook Strait has been entirely discounted? Along with a pod transport system and trackless trams along the Auckland waterfront to service the stadium which will float on jet skis, a balloon system is being trialed in a Canadian town.

    Most importantly it will free up car parking spaces as it will not provide for vehicular passage.