Sunday, 24 May 2009

If the future of “transport” was Green . . . [updated]

Today Russel Norman and several thousand fellow luddites took a walk over Auckland’s Harbour Bridge to show the future of Auckland transport under Green governance.  And so they did. The the result of their somnambulist, self-absorbed stroll over Auckland’s most important traffic conduit was predictable: complete traffic chaos around Auckland. And this was on a Sunday!

Anybody wanting to drive around the city’s inner suburbs this morning while Norman and his sweaty rabble hiked their way over the bridge would have been better advised to have stayed in bed, since the resulting gridlock meant that any kind of movement was Sisyphian, and painfully slow.

“We need a revolution in transport in Auckland,” says Russel Norman fresh from demonstrating just what his Green transport “revolution” would do for anyone who wants to move around the city using anything more potent than an ox cart.  Just as the defining characteristic of Green energy systems is that they don’t really produce energy, so was can now see the defining characteristic of Green transport solutions – that they make it hard to get around.

What’s needed is not a revolution for luddites, but one that takes cognisance of how the vast majority of Aucklanders actually want to move around the city, not how a vocal minority think we should.

If the future of transport was Green, then the idea of actual transport – to move people and their things around – would be something to be read about only in history books.

UPDATELiberty Scott weighs in:

Oh and if you think NZTA stuffed up, you might find it isn't legally empowered to exempt people from traffic rules - the fact it did so before for the Hikoi does not change that.

    The Greens endorsed it, so it's about time to see how many other traffic laws the Greens happily will let you break. . .  The Greens have decided it's better to break a law than propose a new one. The oath that Green MPs declared to uphold the law has slipped to one side when it comes to inciting people to break this one - odd for a party that is so keen on promoting new laws. . .
    Let's be clear, I don't care either way if a walkway or cycleway is attached to the Auckland Harbour Bridge, as long as those who will use it pay for it. The NZ Transit Authority cannot authorise people to walk and cycle on a motorway . . .  However, this rather pathetic little protest is about people wanting to force you to pay for a facility for them to use - and not giving a damn about who they disrupt along the way.

That’s “green transport solutions” in a nutshell.  Read vav .


  1. I'm an Aucklander, I'm a cyclist, I'd use a Harbour Bridge cycle path if there was one and this stupid protest means their cause lost my support.

    (My post re this is linked from this comment)

  2. The environment, our place in it and sustainability issues are all OUR problems. I ain't going to screw up my place in the world (or my ability to maintain it) by handing the responsibility over to nutters like these!

  3. Isn't a Harbour Bridge cycle-way a mere formality now we're getting a super-duper bike track the whole length of the country anyway?

    Regardless, these damned hippes won't be happy till there's horseshit all over the roads again.


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.